Earlier this week, we wrote about how fake Rolex spam was surpassing fake Viagra spam. Rolex, obviously, has decided this isn't a good thing, and wants to go after the spammers. Unfortunately, it looks like the lawyers they've hired to do so are a bit clueless. They sent a cease-and-desist letter to a mailing list that received Rolex spam. It's not hard to see how this happened. The mailing list received some fake-Rolex-spam, which was then archived on the web, along with all the other messages on the mailing list. However, the lawyers apparently couldn't figure out the difference between someone sending the spam, and someone receiving the spam, and are threatening the owner of the domain that hosts the list with damages reaching $1,000,000 for diluting their trademark.

A federal judge ruled against Microsoft on Wednesday in a patent suit challenging "AutoPlay" technology included in recent versions of Microsoft Windows.

Judge Jeffrey White of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied three Microsoft motions for summary judgment in a suit filed by TV Interactive Data (TVI), a small Monte Sereno, Calif., company specializing in interactive television technology.

Each motion sought to invalidate TVI patents cited in the case, on grounds of prior art and other causes. White ruled Microsoft offered insufficient evidence against the patents, and the case should go to trial as scheduled.

Microsoft Corp. is behind schedule in complying with a court order to document its proprietary communications protocols, according to U.S. authorities monitoring its behavior. It also plans to release the documents in a file format that cannot be annotated, and can only be used with Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser, they said in a report published Friday.

The plaintiffs have three main areas of concern about the documentation.

First among these is that Microsoft, asked to open up and document the interfaces to its communication protocols for licensees, has chosen to issue the documentation in a rights-protected file format called MHT, readable only with its own Web browser, Internet Explorer. This means licensees can neither annotate nor effectively search the information, according to the plaintiffs.

Contracts for Microsoft's .Net Framework require that licensees ask Microsoft for permission before publishing benchmark testing results for the framework. Since this information could be key to effectively comparing Microsoft products with those of its competition, and the license provision could be used to prevent such comparison, the plaintiffs asked Microsoft to change it. Microsoft agreed to modify it to require only prior notice from licensees of their intent to publish, so that it can attempt to reproduce the results itself. "Microsoft does not object to benchmarking of non-Microsoft software against the .Net Framework," it said in the report.

Thursday morning, US authorities issued a federal order to Rackspace ordering them to hand over Indymedia web servers to the requesting agency. Rackspace, which provides hosting services for more that 20 Indymedia sites at its London facility, complied and turned over the requested servers, effectively removing those sites from the internet.

Since the subpoena was issued to Rackspace and not to Indymedia, the reasons for this action are still unknown to Indymedia. Talking to Indymedia volunteers, Rackspace stated that "they cannot provide Indymedia with any information regarding the order." ISPs have received gag orders in similar situations which prevent them from updating the concerned parties on what is happening.

The last few months have seen numerous attacks on independent media by the US Federal Government. In August the Secret Service used a subpoena in an attempt to disrupt the NYC IMC before the RNC by trying to get IP logs from an ISP in the US and the Netherlands. Last month the FCC shut down community radio stations around the US. Two weeks ago the FBI requested that Indymedia takes down a post on the Nantes IMC that had a photo of some undercover Swiss police and IMC volunteers in Seattle were visited by the FBI on the same issue.

Peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharers in the UK could soon face legal action from the recording industry.

The Recording Industry Association of America has sued around 5,400 people over the past year, fining them on average $3,000 a piece in an effort to discourage the online swapping of music, which it claims has damaged CD sales.

"We have been quite satisfied with [our] awareness campaign, and use of P2P networks has gone down as people are more aware. But there is still a problem [with illegal file sharing] in the UK," said a BPI spokesman.

"We have seen that litigation has had a practical effect in the US and Europe, and it seems that for some people it is the only way to deter them."

The BPI did not say how it would obtain the names of the P2P users, or what kind of fines it would ask the courts to impose.

It's official. All iPod users are music thieves - according to Microsoft CEO Steve 'Monkey Boy' Ballmer.

He singles out the Mac maker for attention because - wait for it - "we've had DRM in Windows for years". The implication is that DRM hasn't been in the Mac OS for a similar duration, and that's what's allowed all those stolen tracks to seep through onto the web.

Windows has, of course, also had Napster, Grokster, Streamcast, Aimster, Kazaa full and lite, et al for years, but - again - none of that Windows-only music theft apparatus has registered on Mr Ballmer's radar screen, it seems.

No, there's no music piracy on Windows, and that's because Windows has had DRM for so long. People haven't been ripping CDs. They haven't been sharing the songs using Windows-based P2P software. And other folk haven't been downloading and transferring them to portable players. Clearly, all those shared tracks have just popped out of nowhere.

Then again, Microsoft has been promising to offer easier to use DRM since at least 2002, as its then Windows Media Player wish list revealed. Yes, that's right WMP users want what MS wants, ie. DRM and more of it, please.

As if Diebold didn't have enough problems already, they've now lost a case to a bunch of students who were posting copies of the internal documents revealing that the company knew about the various security problems in their systems. Diebold responded not be dealing with the problems, but by going after the students under the DMCA, claiming that the documents were copyrighted material. Of course, amusingly, by doing so they provided proof that the documents were real and that Diebold did really know about the security problems, but just chose not to fix them. The EFF eventually sued Diebold to get them to stop sending out these bogus DMCA takedown notices -- and the judge seems to have agreed this was a violation, ruling clearly: "no reasonable copyright holder could have believed that portions of the e-mail archive discussing possible technical problems with Diebold's voting machines were protected by copyright." He also pointed out that Diebold, "knowingly materially misrepresented" the situation concerning those who posted the documents. Apparently, this is the first time a company has been found guilty of sending out bogus takedown notices, but sets a good precedent for others to fight back as well.

If you file swap more than 1000 music files you could be punished by three years in prison under a new law passed in the US.

The US House of Representatives has agreed to take the attack of file-sharers carried out by the movie and file industry out of the civil courts and make it a criminal offence.

Now the FBI will pursue those who allow others to copy their music collections through "peer to peer" networks like Kazaa and Morpheus. Agents will now investigate intellectual-property crimes and allow them to send warnings to users they suspect of copying songs illegally. Those found to be sharing more than 1,000 copyrighted files could face jail.

A sponsor of the bill said that the Internet has revolutionised how Americans locate information, shop and communicate, but it must not become a haven for criminals.

Thousands of people have signed up to call their congressional representatives Tuesday to protest the Induce Act, a controversial copyright bill that many fear would undermine the legal protections that allow consumers to make personal copies of music or movies they've bought.

The Induce Act, officially known as the Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act (SB2560), was introduced in June by Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont). It would hold technology companies liable for making products that encourage customers to infringe copyright.

Television, movie and music companies have given $168,928 in campaign donations to Hatch since 1999, according to Opensecrets.org, a website run by the Center for Responsive Politics, an organization that tracks campaign donations. Leahy received $232,050 in the same period. The internet, computer and telecommunications industries donated less money to each.

A Florida man is facing 33 months in prison after pleading guilty to conspiring to distribute a controlled substance.

Vineet Chhabra ran a series of websites offering Viagra, diet pills and other controlled drugs. Customers had to fill in online questionaires or complete a telephone interview but did not need to see a doctor or submit a prescription, as required under US law. His sister Sabina Faruqui also pleaded guilty and faces one-year probation. Five others, including a doctor and a pharmacist have already pleaded guilty. In total, 11 have been charged as a result of the three-year investigation.

Chhabra will be back in court for sentencing on 3 December. Prosecutors claim he has made $125m from running the sites - money he may have to forfeit or pay in fines. According to wire reports, he may also lose 15 luxury vehicles, including six Mercs, 72 pieces of jewelery, the contents of 60 bank accounts scattered around the world and property, including a $2m office building in Weston, Florida.