VERY,VERY HOT READS, I Would Read The News In This Thread This Thead Is To post Any Thing Ye Want About The News,,NEWS WAS MOVED,READ MY FIRST POS...

AnyDVD History

5.9.1.1, 2006 02 15
- Important: When installing this version over an existing
installation, you must reboot your machine. Otherwise the changes
made in the AnyDVD device driver will not have any effect!
- New: Added workaround for DVDShrink / Nero Recode "Out of memory"
error when copying Macrovision RipGuard protected discs with
menus, e.g. "Madagascar" R1 (US)
- New: Error zones on RipGuard/Arccos/PuppetLock protected titles are
now replaced with "valid material". 3rd party tools like DVDDecrypter
will now work better (no more "Pack Header Error" messages - another try,
this time it should really work).
- Note: To use DVDDecrypter with AnyDVD set I/O Model to SPTI or ElbyCDIO.
Set CSS Cracking method to none. Disable checking for structure
protection.
- New: Added "AnyDVD Ripper". This little tool repairs defective DVDs
while copying them to your harddisk. It can be started from the menu of
the AnyDVD fox icon. It can be started as a stand alone application from
the start menu as well, so it can be used even if AnyDVD is not registered
and the trial period has expired.
It is identical to FixVTS (http://www.videohelp.com/~FixVTS/) but instead
of fixing problems "in place" it copies the files to your harddisk directly
from the source DVD. It fixes the problems while the files are copied.
Some DVDs which have severe mastering defects e.g.,
"Menace II Society" R1 (US) can now be copied with all DVD copy tools
(elby CloneDVD, DVDShrink, etc.) Many thanks to the author of FixVTS!
- Fix: Hang after update check with some system configurations
- Some minor fixes and improvements
- Updated languages

http://static.slysoft.com/SetupAnyDVD.exe

 

SlySoft CloneCD v5.2.8.1

CloneCD is a powerful CD-Copy program. It writes in Raw mode, which allows it to have total control on the data written. Therefore, it will produce real 1:1 copies of your CDs. Because of its special operation, it requires a CD-Writer which is capable of writing in this mode.
CloneCD 5.2.8.1 Changes:
- Fix: Capacity of DVD-R media was sometimes not reported correctly
- Updated languages

http://static.slysoft.com/SetupCloneCD.exe

 

MPAA, RIAA, joint operation,


p2p news / p2pnet: The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department (LASD)says it's the area's largest provider of contract law services and that the concept has proven so successful that to date, 40 of the 88 cities in Los Angeles County were using it, "for their complete municipal law enforcement services".

Does Hollywood count as a city? Maybe that's why the MPAA and RIAA were able to get LSAD officers to act as music and move industry cops to "develop and implement innovative tactics to protect artists, songwriters, record labels and many others in the music community".

Wow.

"Whether the pirates are on the street or on the tracks, they cannot escape the radar of these vigilant officials," declares Mike Robinson, the MPAA's (Motion Picture Association of America" new director of US Anti-Piracy Operations.

So what did the LASD do to earn such fulsome praise?

They nailed nine subway hawkers who were peddling counterfeit CDs and DVDs.

“Just as piracy changes, so must our enforcement strategies," says Brad Buckles, Robinson's opposite number in the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America). "We cannot allow our nation’s public transportation system to serve as a vehicle for the pirate goods trade." After all, "allowing criminals to line their pockets through the sale of pirated music … hurts local record stores, and musicians".

Indeed. And it's "damaging to the quality of life in the community as well," he states without explaining what it's damaging, or how.

The investigation was jointly conducted by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department Transit Services Bureau, the MPAA and the RIAA, boast the latter two in a joint puff release.

They don't say how many sheriff's officers were involved in the farce, how much it cost or how many other investigations were side-lined while it was in hand.

(Wednesday 15th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7933

 

Dude, i gotta get me this shirt!

 

RIAA et al. says CD ripping, backups not fair use

2/15/2006 3:17:17 PM, by Ken "Caesar" Fisher

If anyone has any doubts about the content industry's resolve to destroy fair use and usher in new ways of charging you for uses that were previously both free and fair, look no further. As part of the triennial review of the effectiveness of the DMCA, a number of content-related industries have filed a joint reply (PDF)
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2006/reply/11metalitz_AAP.pdf

with the government on the effectiveness of the DMCA and the challenges that lay ahead for copyright. As you might expect, the document is a celebration of the DMCA, and the industries are pushing for even more egregious abuses of technology to fatten up their bottom lines.

With regards to the argument that the DMCA is bad law because it prevents users from making backups, the joint reply dismissed such arguments as "uncompelling." First, they argue that there is no evidence that "any of the relevant media are 'unusually subject to damage in the ordinary course of their use.'" This "cart-before-the-horse" argument suggests that people do not need to backup anything that does not have a high failure rate—a view that fundamentally misunderstands the purpose of backups. Furthermore, they argue that the success of DVD sales vis-à-vis VHS demonstrates that whatever problem there might be, it's not big enough to matter to consumers, because DVD sales are skyrocketing while VHS isn't. Thus high sales volumes are indicators that the consumer are well served, which is an argument that we'll hope never takes hold in the pharmaceutical industry (Vioxx sure did sell well!).

Such are the lengths they will go through in order to keep the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA intact. But supporting the status quo isn't in their interest. No, the idea is to embrace and extend. To wit, the joint reply also argues that making backups of your CDs is also not fair use.

The [submitted arguments in favor of granting exemptions to the DMCA] provide no arguments or legal authority that making back up copies of CDs is a noninfringing use. In addition, the submissions provide no evidence that access controls are currently preventing them from making back up copies of CDs or that they are likely to do so in the future. Myriad online downloading services are available and offer varying types of digital rights management alternatives. For example, the Apple FairPlay technology allows users to make a limited number of copies for personal use. Presumably, consumers concerned with the ability to make back up copies would choose to purchase music from a service that allowed such copying. Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices. Similar to the motion picture industry, the recording industry has faced, in online piracy, a direct attack on its ability to enjoy its copyrights. (emphasis added)

As you can see, the argument is hinged partially on the cost of replacements. Why should you be allowed to make backups of CDs you've purchased when you can replace them? And why should CD backups be legal when users can already decided to purchase from (DRM-laden) services that do allow the limited copying of lossy music files? Here, again, we see the way in which the RIAA et al. would like to see contract law take over the domain of fair use. "Leave it up to DRM, you big dummies!"

But they're not done with that argument. The real kicker is buried in a footnote, where the joint reply suggests the unthinkable: that making copies of CDs for any purpose may, in fact, be infringement.

Nor does the fact that permission to make a copy in particular circumstances is often or even "routinely" granted, see C6 at 8, necessarily establish that the copying is a fair use when the copyright owner withholds that authorization. In this regard, the statement attributed to counsel for copyright holders in the Grokster case, is simply a statement about authorization, not about fair use.

Allow me to translate: just because people have been copying CDs in the past doesn't mean that that they had the authorization to do so, and a general trend does not override such explicit authorization. But as the EFF has picked up, the RIAA is engaging in a little historical revision. Their last comment about the Grokster case is attempting to change the substance of comments that were uttered by their own legal counsel. Why they would do this is abundantly clear when you see the statement in question:

"The record companies, my clients, have said, for some time now, and it's been on their website for some time now, that it's perfectly lawful to take a CD that you've purchased, upload it onto your computer, put it onto your iPod."

It looks like someone is having a change of heart.

In the world of the joint reply, if and when the RIAA and its member studios say that copying your CDs is not permitted, then it's not permitted. Forget fair use. Forget historical precedent. The joint reply here is arguing that copyright owners have the authority to deny what has become fair use—what their own lawyers have admitted is fair use in front of the Supreme Court of the United States. The upshot is that this argument suggests that the most common form of CD "copying"—namely ripping CDs for use on computers and portable players—is not necessarily fair use. The joint reply adds:

Similarly, creating a back-up copy of a music CD is not a non-infringing use, for reasons similar to those the Register canvassed in detail in her 2003 determination that back-up copying of DVDs cannot be treated as noninfringing. [Ed note: see above arguments.] While we recognize that access controls may in some circumstances affect copying, the fact remains that there is no general exception to the reproduction right to allow back-up copying (except the limited exception in § 117 for computer programs) and thus no justification for allowing circumvention of access controls for this purpose.

Inasmuch as the joint reply was grafted in defense of the DMCA, it remains unclear if the RIAA has any plans to take up this line of argument in front of legislators or the public. It does mark, however, yet another development in the erosion of fair use, and it demonstrates that the insidious notion of "customary historic use" stems from part of the industry's campaign to legislate new business models that fly in the face of fair use, the doctrine of first sale, and limited copyrights.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060215-6190.html

 

EFF says Clear Channel patent doesn't sound right
2/15/2006 5:05:25 PM, by Peter Pollack

A while back, we reported on the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) effort to take down some of the bogus patents that have been popping up in recent years—patents granted on previously existing or very obvious technology. Yesterday they decided to throw down the gauntlet on one of them: the recording patent purchased by Clear Channel in 2004, which that company claims grants them exclusive rights over any system used to make recordings during concerts with the goal of offering them for sale in digital format immediately afterward.

Clear Channel claims that its patent creates a monopoly on all-in-one technologies that produce post-concert live recordings on digital media and has threatened to sue anyone who makes such recordings with a different system. This has forced bands like the Pixies into using Clear Channel's proprietary technology, and it hurts investment and innovation in new systems developed by other companies.

I do not have a legal background, but I do have an audio one, so I took it upon myself to look up the original patent that Clear Channel purchased. Although much of the document is fairly dry and formal, I think it's worth reprinting part of the abstract of the patent application:

[...] the present invention provides an event recording system that has an event-capture module, an editing module, and a media recording module. The event-capture module captures an event signal [...] and transforms the signal into a primary event file that is accessible as it is being formed. The editing module is communicatively connected to the event capture module. [...] Likewise, the media recording module is communicatively linked to the editing module for receiving the one or more digital track files from the editing module. The media recording module has a plurality of media recorders for simultaneously recording the one or more digital track files onto a plurality of recording media. This allows a plurality of recording media, with the entire event recorded upon each media, to be available shortly after the event has ended.

To summarize, the patent unites a recording device, a digital editing device, and a digital reproduction device, for the purpose of making multiple copies of a recording available quickly. In essence, the patent applicants claim to have invented the recording studio, with the additional parameter that the reproductions be made available "shortly after the event has ended."

Wiring together a few existing parts of a recording system does not necessarily mean you have a patentable concept, so the other key point besides the nebulous delivery deadline is the unified nature of the system. The EFF has decided to attack the patent using the concept of prior art, and the horse they're backing is the Telex EDAT, a combination of software and peripherals that convert a PC into a mastering system for cassettes and CDs. Since EDAT was released in the late '90s, it predates the 2003 patent which Clear Channel purchased in 2004.

I think the EFF makes an excellent case, although I think it's a reflection on the sad state of our patent process that they even have to. I could probably spend an hour listing ways you could record a live performance and offer it for sale quickly, beginning in the 1940s with a bank of reel-to-reel recorders and ending in current day with MP3s downloaded onto a USB flash drive. The only thing that made post-concert recordings emerge in the last few years is feasibility. Before the advent of high-speed CD recorders, it would have been impractical to offer copies for sale after a concert: most other media would have either been prohibitively expensive or required more time to dupe than the audience's trek to the door.

In my reading of the patent application, it appears that the "inventors" did little besides assemble existing technology, then write a patent designed to lock up a broad range of activities. In that sense, they were successful: they scored their patent and managed to sell it to some big sucker with deep pockets. It's Clear Channel's problem now. They bought it, and are placed in the position of defending the indefensible.

That's not to say Clear Channel won't win. Those corporate deep pockets will now be used to cast legal doubt on the EFF's case. As we saw with the on-again off-again Microsoft FAT patent situation, it's not easy to overturn a patent, and almost anything can happen once lawyers pull out all the stops.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060215-6191.html

 

Microsoft screws up somewhat on Tuesday patch

But it's OK now, security is paramount

By INQUIRER staff: Wednesday 15 February 2006, 10:26
WE REPORTED YESTERDAY that a serious problem with Windows Media Player could be addressed by downloading the monthly Tuesday Windows update from Vole Central.

See Dangerous bug found in Windows Media Player.

We also reported that when we'd done so on two separate machines, we noticed that one of the patches failed to install.

This, fortunately, wasn't the WMP patch, which installed just fine. It was Security Update for Windows XP number KB913446.

This was undoubtedly a SNAFU, because this morning said patch now works fine. Below is a screen capture of the problem, which was also confirmed by many of our readers from all over the world. µ


http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29719

 

VIRTUAL CD-ROM CONTROL PANEL..........

Microsoft has an unsupported Virtual CD-ROM Control Panel for Windows XP. It contains no setup (only instructions) and the interface is quite basic. But the software does its job very well.....(free).....GO THERE!


From Tom's Corner
A few days ago I needed to install software from ISO images. There were two possibilies: burning the ISO images to a CD-ROM or using a virtual CD-ROM drive that can mount ISO images. My preference went out to the latter, so I decided to Google for it. And apparently Microsoft has an unsupported "Virtual CD-ROM Control Panel for Windows XP". The reason why it's unsupported became clear after downloading the product. It contains no setup (only instructions) and the interface is quite basic. But the software did its job very well.
This tool is even not searchable through the "Microsoft Download Center", but it is mentioned on the MSDN Subscribers FAQ.
You have surely other tools to do that like the excellent Iso Buster
http://weblogs.asp.net/pleloup/archive/2004/01/15/58918.aspx



http://download.microsoft.com/downl...d58df02efa2/winxpvirtualcdcontrolpanel_21.exe

 

Firms' China actions 'abhorrent'
p2p news / p2pnet: Depending on what you read, four major Net companies have been "slammed," "grilled," "scolded" or merely "chided" for helping China implement censorship policies

But whatever you read, they all, "found themselves branded collaborators with the Chinese government in suppressing dissent in return for access to a booming Internet market," as the Associated Press.

Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and Cisco were testifying the House International Relations Committee and, "Your abhorrent actions in China are a disgrace," it has Tom Lantos saying.

"I simply don't understand how your corporate leadership sleeps at night."

The companies claim a lust for profits wasn't the motivating factor for their involvements. Rather, as good corporate citizens, they're following China's rules, but only to help Chinese surfers.

Yahoo's senior vp and general counsel, Michael Callahan, told the committee his company was "very distressed" at having to comply with Chinese law, says AP.

Yahoo is said to have recently given China information which allowed the authorities to jail two cyber-dissidents.

Elliot Schrage, vp of global communications and public affairs for Google, which has admitted its role as a censor for China, was able to say it was, "not something we did enthusiastically or something we're proud of at all. ... We have begun a path that we believe will ultimately benefit our users in China."

Under "pointed questioning about Google's role in abetting censorship, Schrage, his voice cracking, said: 'I am not ashamed of it, and I am not proud of it'," says Fortune.

Jack Krumholtz, "Microsoft's top Washington operative," said Bill and the Boyz were, "deeply troubled" by the requirement that Microsoft censor blogs but said that, as a result, "There's more opportunity for freedom of expression in China today," says the story, adding:

"U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, who chaired the House subcommittee hearing, compared the tech company's actions to IBM's collaboration with Nazi Germany during World War II. Smith, a New Jersey Republican, dismissed the claim by firms that they have to obey local laws.

"If the secret police a half century ago asked where Anne Frank was hiding, would the correct answer be to hand over the information in order to comply with local laws?" Smith asked.

"We must stand with the oppressed, not the oppressors."

Cisco, accused of providing technology that allows China to filter internet content, "testified that it sells the same equipment in China that it does elsewhere." says the Times."

Stay tuned.

Also See:
Associated Press - Congress chides 4 companies over China, February 15, 2006
Fortune - Tech execs get grilled over China business, February 15, 2006
Times - Google and Yahoo face their Congressional critics, February 15, 2006

=====================

If you're Chinese and you're looking for a way to access independent Internet news sources, try Freegate. It's a free DIT program written to help Chinese citizens circumvent website blocking outside of China.

Download it here and feel free to copy the zip and host it yourself so others can download it.

(Wednesday 15th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7934

 

Then and Now, what happened to Janet Jackson, Ugh!!

Janet Jackson Is So Fat She's Been Told...
...to lose 20 pounds by September or her record company won't release her new album. If that's not an incentive to diet and work out, what is?
That's the word from New York Post "Page Six" gossip columnist Richard Johnson who reports that her label, Virgin, needs a thin, lithe Janet in order to properly market it. An unnamed inside source dished to Page Six, "Janet had a really bad year. After the incident at the Super Bowl [two years ago], it just went downhill. Her album 'Damita Jo' was a flop. Then her brother Michael had the child-molestation trial--it just wasn't good to her."
So Janet enjoyed her comfort food and her waistline grew. And grew. In January, the New York Daily News reported that she feasted on a steady diet of "fried chicken and soul food" that included macaroni and cheese, candied yams, pork ribs and buttered corn bread, ballooning up from 118 pounds to a peak of 160 pounds.
Now Virgin has hired a personal trainer for Janet and put her on a diet. Still, yo-yo weight gain and loss is not that atypical for the pop star. "Janet always gains weight when she's not working and always loses it in time to promote her albums. Janet always takes care of it when it matters," the friend told Page Six.

 

Payback time for Sony BMG,

p2p news / p2pnet: Music fans who bought Sony BMG music CDs polluted with secret digital restrictions management (DRM) software can now claim clean CDs and extra downloads as part of a class action lawsuit settlement, says the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

The EFF and co-counsel Green Welling LLP, Lerach, Coughlin, Stoia, Geller, Ruchman and Robbins, and the Law Offices of Lawrence E. Feldman and Associates, together with a coalition of other plaintiffs' class action counsel, reached the settlement after negotiations with Sony BMG in December of 2005, it says.

"Anyone who purchased Sony BMG CDs that included First4Internet XCP and SunnComm MediaMax software can receive the same music without DRM," says the foundation. "Some will also get downloads of other Sony BMG music from several different services, including iTunes."

Music fans have through the end of the year to participate in the settlement and should receive their compensation within six to eight weeks, says the EFF.

Go here to submit a claim. .
http://www.sonybmgcdtechsettlement.com/

Go here for litigation documents and a FAQ.

(Thursday 16th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7938




Welcome to the Information Web Site for the
Sony BMG CD Technologies Settlement
www.sonybmgcdtechsettlement.com
(Last updated on February 13, 2006)

This website was established to provide information about a proposed class action settlement involving SONY BMG Music Entertainment, Inc., SunnComm International Inc., and First 4 Internet, Ltd. (“Defendants”).

The proposed settlement involves persons who bought, received or used SONY BMG CDs with either XCP or MediaMax software. If you have installed XCP software or MediaMax software on your computer, you will need to uninstall the software or download an important security update as part of this claim process.

If you have played a CD on your computer that contains either XCP or MediaMax 5.0 content protection software, you should update or uninstall the software to reduce your risk of security vulnerabilities.

The Summary Notice and other documents explain the settlement, the benefits it provides, and the options that you have, including how to submit a Claim Form. Claim Forms are due by December 31, 2006. If you would like to submit a Claim Form online, please click here.

You may obtain further information about this Settlement by clicking on the appropriate link(s) at this website. For more detailed information, please click on the Notice to Class Members.

To submit your claim in hard copy by U.S. mail, click here.

Certain documents are in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. If your computer is not already configured with the Acrobat software to view and print these documents, you may get Acrobat for free by clicking the logo below.
http://www.sonybmgcdtechsettlement.com/

 

Ripping CDs to iPods

p2p news / p2pnet: Leave no stone unturned in the quest to milk the last drop of money from cash-cow consumers, is the motto of the Big Four record label Organized Music cartel.

With that in mind, will it soon be out of bounds, "to continue to make copies of your own CDs on your own iPod"? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


RIAA Says Ripping CDs to Your iPod is NOT Fair Use
By Fred von Lohmann - Deep Links

It is no secret that the entertainment oligopolists are not happy about space-shifting and format-shifting. But surely ripping your own CDs to your own iPod passes muster, right? In fact, didn't they admit as much in front of the Supreme Court during the MGM v. Grokster argument last year?

Apparently not.

As part of the on-going DMCA rule-making proceedings, the RIAA and other copyright industry associations submitted a filing that included this gem as part of their argument that space-shifting and format-shifting do not count as noninfringing uses, even when you are talking about making copies of your own CDs:

"Nor does the fact that permission to make a copy in particular circumstances is often or even routinely granted, necessarily establish that the copying is a fair use when the copyright owner withholds that authorization. In this regard, the statement attributed to counsel for copyright owners in the MGM v. Grokster case is simply a statement about authorization, not about fair use."

For those who may not remember, here's what Don Verrilli said to the Supreme Court last year:

"The record companies, my clients, have said, for some time now, and it's been on their website for some time now, that it's perfectly lawful to take a CD that you've purchased, upload it onto your computer, put it onto your iPod."

If I understand what the RIAA is saying, "perfectly lawful" means "lawful until we change our mind." So your ability to continue to make copies of your own CDs on your own iPod is entirely a matter of their sufferance. What about all the indie label CDs? Do you have to ask each of them for permission before ripping your CDs? And what about all the major label artists who control their own copyrights? Do we all need to ask them, as well?

P.S.: The same filing also had this to say: "Similarly, creating a back-up copy of a music CD is not a non-infringing use...."

(Thanks, Bill E)

(Thursday 16th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7935

 

No China worries for Hollywood,

p2p news / p2pnet: The Big Four record label cartel's IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry) and Hollywood's MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) have enthusiastically endorsed the China National Copyright Administration's (NCA) shut down of 76 web sites as, "hard but effective," says state news agency Xinhua.

The friendly ties between China and the entertainment cartels haven't been remarked upon, let alone criticised, in stark contrast to its dealings with four of America's largest Net companies, Microsoft, Google, Yahoo and Cisco, who are being attacked for their efforts to work with the People's Republic. During their testimony to the House International Relations Committee, yesterday, "Your abhorrent actions in China are a disgrace," Tom Lantos told them.

"I simply don't understand how your corporate leadership sleeps at night."

But insomnia doesn't trouble MPAA boss Dan Glickman. He sleeps very well indeed, thank you, and in fact spends much of his time jetting back and forth between the US and China as Hollywood further cements the already close relationships between what amount to two totalitarian regimes.

"This special operation has achieved its purpose and has been favorably looked upon by the public and overseas rights-holders' organizations," NCA deputy commissioner Yan Xiaohong is quoted as saying.

"The administration also fined 29 websites 789,000 yuan (98,625 U.S. dollars) and transferred 18 suspected criminal cases to judiciary courts during the operation," Yan said.

But one special operation wasn't enough to, "eliminate Internet infringement, he said, because like many other countries, "China has not found a right approach yet".

Meanwhile, "the State Council is expected to issue a statute on Internet information spread rights to regulate networks and fortify the defense of private and non-profit Internet websites," Yan said, According to Xinhua.

"China joined the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in 1980 and its two international treaties out of the total six - the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the Geneva Convention for the Protection of Producers of Phonograms Against Unauthorized Duplication of their Phonograms," says the story, adding that Yan said China is now considering joining the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, "both enacted for copyright protection on the Internet".

China's goal is to, "create an environment favorable for both copyright protection and the product dissemination, and thus leave Internet information on hand for the public's study and entertainment," Yan added.

Also See:
76 web sites - China 'piracy' clamp-down, February 15, 2006
Xinhua - China stands firm in fighting Internet piracy, February 15, 2006
disgrace - Firms' China actions 'abhorrent', February 15, 2006

=====================

If you're Chinese and you're looking for a way to access independent Internet news sources, try Freegate. It's a free DIT program written to help Chinese citizens circumvent website blocking outside of China.

Download it here and feel free to copy the zip and host it yourself so others can download it.

(Thursday 16th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7937

 

Amazon vs iTunes,

p2p news / p2pnet: Amazon is getting ready to join the ranks of companies bent on cashing in on music downloans, albeit that a corporate online music market doesn't yet exist to any significant degree.

Amazon is in advanced talks with the Big Four Organized Music labels about another rental service, "with a range of features designed to set it apart," says the Wall Street Journal.

"Among them: Amazon-branded portable music players, designed and built for the retailer, and a subscription service that would deeply discount and preload those devices with songs, not unlike mobile phones that are included with subscription plans as part of the deal.

"Music executives privately welcome Amazon's plans, which they see as one of the only credible challenges to Apple's hegemony in both digital music and portable players. Now the question is whether Amazon's massive customer base is enough to offset a long delay in entering the online music business."

Apple's iTunes is far more of a promo vehicle for iPod than a genuine service and moreover, compared to what's happening in the world of independent online music, where literally billions of songs move computer-to-computer every month, Apple's iTunes sales which, says the company, are approaching the one billion mark after its 2003 start, don't amount to a hill of beans.

And as long as the Big Four continue to use their various 'trade' associations such as the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) in their bizarre marketing scheme through which they're trying to sue customers into buying product, those hundreds of millions of potential buyers will remain far out of reach.

Be that as it may, "The service could be launched as soon as this summer, according to people familiar with the matter," says the story. "Amazon declined to discuss the service, and hasn't finalized deals to license content from major music companies: Vivendi Universal SA's Universal Music Group; Sony BMG, a joint venture of Sony Corp. and Bertelsmann AG; Warner Music Group Corp.; and EMI Group PLC."

Among likely partners for a subsidized hardware offering is Samsung Electronics, "whose flair for stylish design is raising hopes among music executives that the initiative could create a strong alternative to iPod," says the WSJ, going on:

"Amazon has been busy building technology for digital downloads. Amazon says it has hired 3,000 people companywide, including many software-development engineers who presumably are working on digital content initiatives, over the past year. That is more than Google and Yahoo, which hired 2,659 and 2,185 people companywide, respectively, last year."

Also See:
Wall Street Journal - Amazon Plans Music Service To Rival iPod, February 16, 2006

(Thursday 16th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7940

 

Canada's approach to hactivism,

p2p news / p2pnet: In a small basement office at the University of Toronto in Canada, Citizen Lab researchers are getting ready to launch Psiphon, a new weapon in the fight against Net censorship.

"The team at Citizen Lab is now racing to put the final touches on the program in time for its public debut at the international congress of the free-speech group PEN in May," says the Globe and Mail.

"Billed as a uniquely Canadian approach to 'hactivism,' the first generation of Psiphon will then be made publicly available."

Founding director of the Citizen Lab is Ronald J. Deibert, associate professor of political science. Lead Citizen Lab programmers for the Psiphon project are Nart Villeneuve and Michelle Levesque.

Deibert's team is also part of the Open Net Initiative which includes Harvard and Cambridge universities and tries to document the extent of state interference on the Internet and which tries to, "turn the tables on the watchers, to watch the watchers," says Deibert in the Globe and Mail story.

What, precisely, is Psiphon, and how does it work? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Psiphon [Citizen Lab: Censorship Circumvention Technology]

Psiphon is a userfriendly suite of stand alone proxy applications designed to securely circumvent Internet censorship. Specifically intended for personal use, Psiphon replaces the technological networks of peer-to-peer and public proxy systems with human or social networks based on relations of trust. Psiphon is installed on personal computers in locations where Internet access is not restricted in order to allow a select group of family and friends in restricted locations to browse the Internet freely.

Psiphon is a product of the The Citizen Lab (University of Toronto), a founding partner of the OpenNet Initiative.

OVERVIEW

Psiphon (and its related suite of tools) will be of use to any person or group of people living in a country where there is Internet content filtering and who have friends or relatives living in countries where there is not. Apart from the general citizen/diaspora networks, Psiphon can be employed by networks of human rights and civil society advocates. Given the extent to which many of the countries of concern that censor the Internet have large diaspora populations in North America and Europe (e.g., Chinese, Iranian), the Psiphon will enable a practical, user-friendly and secure way for citizens within these countries to capitalize on those networks of trust and surf the Internet freely.

Unlike other circumvention technologies, Psiphon relies on multiple social networks of trust. Psiphon does not depend on mass publication of IPs or proxies, which in turn can be easily intercepted and filtered by a determined state, but rather on “word of mouth” and multiple, smaller networks of trust. The users would include any group that wishes to communicate over and access information from the Internet freely.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

A. Psiphon application and Psiphon Repeater

Psiphon is a personal proxy application designed to allow users to circumvent Internet censorship from countries where content filtering takes place. Psiphon is installed on computers in locations that do not censor the Internet and is accessible through a browser by users in locations that are censored. Users in censored countries do not need to install any software. There are two methods of connection currently under development:

a) A system in which the user modifies the proxy settings in their browser to point to the location of psiphon.

b) A system in which users simply browse to the location of psiphon and are presented with a web form interface, through which the user requests websites.

An additional project, which is a concurrent fork of the Psiphon codebase, is the Psiphon Repeater. The Repeater is a standalone application designed to securely forward requests to and from users trying to circumvent Internet censorship and large proxy servers. In other words, the Repeater accepts connections from users and then forwards them to a proxy server location. The Repeater is not a proxy server itself; rather, it acts as an intermediary through which a proxy server can be reached. Designed for use with (web) proxy applications, the Repeater itself does not actually fetch requests for the user. This is handled by the proxy server that the Repeater connects to. In this scenario, the Repeater user's IP address does not show up in web server logs limiting any legal liabilities or concerns a user may have by allowing other users to browse through their computers.

Instead these responsibilities are assumed by the larger institutions running the proxy servers.

B. Psyphon: Key Characteristics and Components

i. Open Source codebase

Psiphon is developed in Python, an open source, interpreted, interactive, object-oriented programming language. Psiphon, is platform independent; it can be run on Windows or Linux/Unix systems (including OS X). Linux and Unix users are required to install Python and OpenSSL. A simple, compiled, executable version of Psiphon is available for Windows users.

ii. Graphical User Interface

Psiphon is managed by the user through a graphical user interface (GUI). The GUI displays the address used to connect to Psiphon (which must be securely sent to the user), the bandwidth throttling options, and the access control system.

iii. Encrypted Network transfer

Psiphon accepts connections the over HTTPS protocol (port 443), but also has options to run over any port. The server uses X.509 public key exchange certificatebased authentication using selfsigned certificates generated with OpenSSL. The certificates are 1024 bit RSA keys, encrypted by a PEM pass phrase. All traffic between the browser and Psiphon is encrypted, including the URL of the website that is being visited.

iv. Access Control System

After the initial security handshake is completed, Psiphon determines whether or not it should accept traffic from the web browser. This is done though HTTP user authentication, which is uuencoded (a program that takes a stream of binary data and returns an obfuscated string) and encrypted through the SSL layer, both of these done seamlessly through methods already supported by all browsers. The user is asked for a username and a password to access the Psiphon system and is only given access to the Psiphon proxy system if these are correct. The usernames and passwords are easily maintained through a user-friendly graphical user interface (GUI) by the Psiphon user.

They can be sent to users of the Psiphon via email, instant messaging, Internet Relay Chat, telephone, or regular mail, whichever users feel is most secure.

v. Bandwidth throttling

Psiphon has a built-in bandwidth quota that allows users to restrict the total amount of bandwidth used by the Psiphon system. In addition, Psiphon can also monitor the amount of traffic generated by specific users. This option specifically protects Psiphon users whose ISPs charge them based on the amount of internet traffic used. If the total bandwidth used has reached the specified limit, Psiphon refuses to accept any more incoming requests until the user resets the quota system. Bandwidth throttling can be turned off if Psiphon users are not concerned with the amount of traffic through their proxy.

vi. Proxification

Once the browser has fully transmitted the request to Psiphon, Psiphon then issues a request to the webpage in question, captures all of the data, and then sends that data to the browser. Psiphon uses streaming technologies such that if a large amount of data is transferred, Psiphon begins to transfer the data it has received back to the browser while it waits for more from the webpage. Between receiving the data from the webpage and transferring it to the browser, Psiphon ensures that all links in the web page it is transferring point through itself, such that the user on the end of the browser can surf the

web seamlessly through the Psiphon proxy system.

Development Team

The Psiphon and related suite of circumvention technologies is a research and development project of the Citizen Lab, Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto. The present and founding director of the Citizen Lab is Professor Ronald J. Deibert, Associate Professor of Political Science. Lead Citizen Lab programmers for the Psiphon project are Nart Villeneuve and Michelle Levesque.

Villeneuve and Levesque are members of the Citizen Lab/Advanced Network Research Group collective. For more information, see http://www.citizenlab.org/

The Psiphon development project benefits from, and is closely related to the Open Net Initiative, a collaborative project among the Citizen Lab, The Berkman Center for Internet & Society (Harvard University), and the Advanced Network Research Group, University of Cambridge. One element of the Open Net Initiative is a Circumvention Technologies Clearinghouse in which major circumvention, security/privacy, and encryption tools for use by civil society and NGOs are archived, assessed, and analyzed.

The development of the Psiphon is thus closely related to analyses of existing circumvention technologies, and has been specifically designed to improve upon their usability and effectiveness.

Also See:
Globe and Mail - Scaling the firewall of digital censorship, February 16, 2006

=====================

If you're Chinese and you're looking for a way to access independent Internet news sources, try Freegate. It's a free DIT program written to help Chinese citizens circumvent website blocking outside of China.

Download it here and feel free to copy the zip and host it yourself so others can download it.

(Thursday 16th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7939

 

Sophos uncovers Mac OS X virus

Leap forward to the Leap A

By INQUIRER staff: Thursday 16 February 2006, 14:27
AV FIRM Sophos said it has encountered a virus for the Apple Mac OS X operating system called Leap-A, or Oompa-A.

The firm said it spreads using the iChat instant messenger, forwarding itself as a file called latestpics.tgz.

When that's opened, it masquerades as JPG graphics icon, using the text oompa as an infection marker in resource forks of infected programs.

Graham Cluley, senior consultant at Sophos, said: "Some owners of Macs held the belief that Mac OS X is incapable of harbouring computer viruses, but Leap A will leave them shellshocked." µ
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29753

 

Next gen video iPod revealed

Patents tell all

By Charlie Demerjian: Thursday 16 February 2006, 14:18
THE NEXT GEN video iPod is being talked about all over the place, and if you read the usual sources (here and here), they have pretty much the same story. This one looks real, but the specs are a tad elusive.

One thing they didn't print is any details. Well, we can help you out there, it is going to be a touch screen video iPod with virtual controls. No more wheel, it will be on the screen like the latest palms.

If you want more, check out the patent dated today here.

We would like to thank Randy of http://www.my-mojo.com/, My Mojo(caution: not worksafe link) for the heads up on this. µ

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29752

 

New DVDs already sparking copy-protection confusion

By John Borland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: February 16, 2006, 4:00 AM PST

When the first high-definition DVDs finally hit shelves this spring, a mad scramble may ensue--not for the discs themselves, but to figure out what computers and devices are actually able to play them in their full glory.

Unraveling the mystery won't be easy. Many, if not most, of today's top-of-the-line computers and monitors won't make the cut, even if next-generation Blu-ray or HD DVD drives are installed.

That's because strict content protection technologies may automatically degrade the DVDs' picture quality, or even block them from playing at all, if the right connections and digital protections aren't in place. Even the most expensive computers sold today mostly lack those features.

Indeed, the consumer backlash has already begun. Graphics-chip makers such as ATI and Nvidia are drawing criticism online for marketing products that are "ready" for these new copy-protection tools but that nevertheless lack critical features needed to let the discs play at top quality.

"This is a sticky issue," said Richard Doherty, an analyst with the Envisioneering Group. "It's going to be very confusing for consumers, and it's going to be very daunting" for computer makers.

The copy-protection muddle stems from Hollywood studios' desire to avoid the film piracy that was born when tools for unlocking the encryption technology on today's DVDs began spreading online in late 1999.

Along with a picture quality upgrade, the new generation of DVDs will be shipped with new digital rights management controls, with strict computerized rules attached saying exactly when and how a movie can be played.

For people who buy standalone DVD players and HDTVs, this mostly won't be a concern, as the right plugs will generally already be built in.

But computer buyers will face a far more challenging landscape. The everyday analog plug that connects most computers to monitors today doesn't support copy protection, and so is viewed as unsafe by Hollywood studios. Movies playing on a computer over this ordinary analog connection will likely be downgraded to near-DVD quality.

Even worse is the so-called DVI plug that sends high-quality digital signals to a monitor but also doesn't support copy protection.

That offers an even greater risk of copying in Hollywood's eyes. Studios have persuaded Microsoft to add a feature in the upcoming Vista operating system that can shut down that connection altogether, unless the computer has an Intel-created encryption technology called HDCP, or High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection, turned on to guard the signal all the way to the monitor screen.

Put another way--if the DVD doesn't like your plug, your monitor may go black.

A newer connection technology called HDMI almost always comes with built-in encryption. If both the computer and the monitor have this installed, everything should work as planned.

Simple question--will it work?
Today, it's extraordinarily difficult to find information that explains whether a company's products will be compatible with the new DVDs.

Part of the problem is that the copy protection technology for the

discs hasn't been officially announced, even though the new DVDs are supposed to hit shelves in just three months. A cross-industry group is working on a technology called the Advanced Access Content System, slated to protect both HD DVDs and Blu-ray discs, and is expected to release its work as soon as next week.

The HDCP technology has widely been expected to be a critical part of those rules, however. In an unusual step, Microsoft told computer makers last year, as part of a preview of its new Vista operating system, that they should start using the Intel-based technology in order to be ready for the high-definition video rules.

IBM engineer Don Leake, who works with the AACS group, confirmed Wednesday that Intel's HDCP would be approved under the new rights-management rules.

But this opens up a new set of potential land mines for consumers.

In one early example, graphics-card maker ATI has marketed some of its top products as "HDCP ready" and says that its newest "All-in-Wonder X1900" card "gives effortless playback of next-generation HD DVD."

However, it doesn't mention that "ready" probably won't be good enough to make the high-definition discs play at full quality. The graphics systems actually have to have the Intel technology turned on, which has to be done by the computer maker, or by ATI itself when it sells a graphics card at retail.

Nvidia, another big graphics-chip maker, says it too has built support for HDCP into its chip designs but that it's up to the computer makers to turn it on. Almost nobody has so far, and that's drawing bitter criticism from gamers and other hardware enthusiasts online, who call the situation a "nightmare."

"We certainly are concerned over end users, and we want to make sure there is no confusion," said Godfrey Cheng, ATI's director of marketing. "But we leave it in the hands of the board vendors and (computer makers) as to whether they want to put that in."

Much of what happens when discs are finally put into computer will ultimately depend on the movie studios themselves. On each disc, it's up to them to set the rules that make all of these alphabet-soup technologies swing into action.

For example, if studios are worried that consumers might be disappointed by degraded resolutions and blacked-out monitors, they could in theory relax those rules until the approved technologies are more widespread.

Backers of the new content protection tools say they're necessary to keep the high-definition discs at the cutting edge for years to come, however.

"What we're coming out with is something that's probably going to live for 15 years or more," IBM's Leake said. "HDCP, even though not well deployed today, will be well deployed in five years. We are planning for the future."
http://news.com.com/2100-1025_3-6040261.html?part=rss&tag=6040261&subj=news

 

RIAA now says ripping is illegal

Opinion Backpedalling to remove rights

By Charlie Demerjian: Thursday 16 February 2006, 09:37
IT'S TIME TO BACKPEDAL for the DRM infecting music industry, but this time, it is on record in black and white.

Luckily, its hypocrisy is as boundless as its greed. Remember when the RIAA (Record Industry Association of America) was arguing in front of the US Supreme Court in the Grokster case, and it said that ripping a CD that you lawfully own to your MP3 player was "perfectly lawful"? Well, now it isn't.

The RIAA is now arguing that it is illegal, and wants to get it legally shut down. No, really, something as trivial as sworn statements to the Supreme Court should be simply taken in jest, right? Well, no, I don't think they are that dumb, but history was never the music industry's strong suit, it is in the box on the shelf, covered with dust, right next to a tiny thing called "conscience". Either way, rights like fair use seems to be a concept totally lost to it.

Anyway, the EFF has a good writeup on the subject on its pages, hopefully the RIAA will go away before it realise that you have two kidneys, and neither are making them the money they feel that they need. Remember, you were warned about the whole organ thing before it was a crime to possess them. µ
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29733