Dear Jailbreaker, Apple Wants to Have a Word with You

Found on Thread Post on Sunday, 20 May 2012
Browse Censorship

After banning the word "jailbreak" from its app store and music library, Apple today reversed course and again permits the term - slang for hacking into a device to download unauthorized content -- to appear on iTunes and its App Store.

Apple maintains it forces sales of company-approved content through its proprietary stores to enhance security and reduce piracy. And while jailbreaking is legal, it violates the terms of use and voids the warranty on iDevices.

A slang for "downloading unauthorized content"? That's just completely false. Jailbreaking simply means getting back the control over the device you paid for, without any limitations the manufacturer forced upon you. It has absolutely nothing to do with unauthorized content. If I pay for a device, I want to be able to use it, no matter what the manufacturer thinks is right or wrong. Funny how Apple fans consider censorship and limitations as a feature. Imagine Microsoft would decide that you are only allowed to install software blessed by Microsoft: everybody would tear them a new one; but if Apple does it, it's for your security.

Microsoft to charge customers $99 to remove OEM 'crapware'

Found on ZDnet on Saturday, 19 May 2012
Browse Software

The OEMs are paid by a variety of software makers to install crapware onto systems. The OEMs don’t disclose how much money they receive from this, but sources tell me that it works out at a few dollars per PC.

Consumers are expected to take their new PC to a Microsoft Store — though there are currently only 16 of them in the United States — and pay Microsoft $99 to remove the crapware that the OEMs were paid to install.

Long gone are the times when you received a simple CD-ROM (or even just floppies) with the OS which you had to install yourself. No crapware, no "pre-configured" system, just install it the way you want. Maybe more consumers should not accept the EULAs when they buy a computer; that gives them the right to return the licenses and since the crapware and the preinstalled OS costs money too, they might even get a discount.

Feds considering allowing DVD-encryption cracking

Found on Ars Technica on Friday, 18 May 2012
Browse Legal-Issues

Federal regulators considered testimony Wednesday here at UCLA Law School on whether to allow citizens and filmmakers to legally crack DVD encryption meant to protect the discs from being copied.

Clarissa Weirick, the general counsel of Warner Brothers Home Entertainment, testified against all the decryption measures.

"If we didn't have access controls, there might be the same kind of mass piracy we've seen with unprotected music," Weirick said about the copying of DVDs.

They said that there is no need to grant the public the right to make copies of their DVDs because the studios are streaming and selling movies online now, and that the public does not own the movies they buy on DVDs. They own the license to play it on a DVD, they argued.

Weirick might be a little out of reality right there. Pirates don't care about the encrytions: they are all broken and high quality versions are released which offer a by far better experience than on the DVD you can buy. No FBI warnings, no unskippable ads and trailers, no region codes. Just what the consumer wants: the movie. Weirick just does not want to let their customers use the product they bought in any way they want. Yes, bought, not licensed. They are afraid that, if cosumers can legally copy DVDs between different devices, the entertainment industry won't be able to sell "licenses" for the same movie again and again to the same customer. Today, the consumer seems to be the Boston Strangler for the movie industry.

Justice Dept. Defends Public’s Constitutional ‘Right to Record’ Cops

Found on Wired on Thursday, 17 May 2012
Browse Legal-Issues

In a surprising letter sent on Monday to attorneys for the Baltimore Police Department, the Justice Department also strongly asserted that officers who seize and destroy such recordings without a warrant or without due process are in strict violation of the individual’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

Police officers should not interfere with a recording and should never seize recording devices without a warrant. They should also be advised “not to threaten, intimidate, or otherwise discourage an individual from recording police officer enforcement activities or intentionally block or obstruct cameras or recording devices.”

Finally someone steps up to teach the police how to behave. If officers would know the laws and understand it, all this would not be needed.

Oracle v Google Judge Is A Programmer!

Found on I Programmer on Wednesday, 16 May 2012
Browse Legal-Issues

One month into the Oracle v Google trial, Judge William Alsup has revealed that he has, and still does, write code.

"I have done, and still do, a significant amount of programming in other languages. I've written blocks of code like rangeCheck a hundred times before. I could do it, you could do it. The idea that someone would copy that when they could do it themselves just as fast, it was an accident."

"Judge: rangeCheck! All it does is make sure the numbers you're inputting are within a range, and gives them some sort of exceptional treatment. That witness, when he said a high school student could do it--"

A judge who actually knows and understands the background of this source-code case? That sure will get interesting. For Oracle.

Chile Threatens to Pull out of TPP because of US IP demands

Found on InfoJustice on Tuesday, 15 May 2012
Browse Politics

Contreras posits that, although “it makes sense” for Chile to participate in the negotiation by the TPP because it was one of the countries who formed the original “P4″ (with Brunei, New Zealand and Singapore) on which TPP is based, Chile is now reassessing whether it should remain in the negotiation.

The P4 had a scant four pages on intellectual property that primarily affirmed TRIPS, with additional listings of geographic indicators and obligations to enter WIPO performances treaties. When the US entered the agreement and pushed it to expand into what is now the TPP, it came with hundreds of incredibly specific intellectual property demands, many of them exceeding any standard in any bilateral or multilateral agreement between any parties.

IP (Imaginary Property) has turned into a goldmine; but only for lawyers though.

How The Counting Crows Learned To Stop Worrying and Love BitTorrent

Found on Forbes on Monday, 14 May 2012
Browse Filesharing

The Counting Crows released their new album Underwater Sunshine three weeks ago, but today they also partnered with BitTorrent to release a free bundle of new tracks, liner notes and artwork as a way of accessing a broader fanbase.

The Counting Crows left their record label in 2009. At the time, frontman Adam Duritz said that the label simply wasn’t equipped to let them play with the internet in the way that they wanted.

BitTorrent users are 31% more likely to purchase digital singles and 100% more likely to pay for a music subscription service.

Since the "official" representatives of the artists, the entertainment industry, is fighting against new technology (and always did) as well as fans, it looks like the only solution for artists is to cut their ties to them and directly connect to their fanbase. With todays technology, the man in the middle is not needed anymore.

Microsoft Funded Startup Aims to Kill BitTorrent Traffic

Found on TorrentFreak on Sunday, 13 May 2012
Browse Filesharing

The company has developed a technology which allows them to attack existing BitTorrent swarms, making it impossible for people to share files.

“We used a number of servers to make a connection to each and every P2P client that distributed this film. Then Pirate Pay sent specific traffic to confuse these clients about the real IP-addresses of other clients and to make them disconnect from each other,” Andrei Klimenko says.

Pirate Pay don’t disclose their exact rates but say they charge between $12,000 and $50,000 depending on the scope of the project.

So basically, they get paid to attack computers which do not belong to them. Last time I checked, this is perfectly illegal in most of the world (probably that's why this startup is based in Russia) and is even seen as a form of terrorism by some governments. Additionally, this also proves that the entertainment industry prefers to pay up to $50,000 for each torrent file to protect their old business model instead of funding projects which are actually interesting for their customers. Not that this is a great success anyway: the majority of clients already notice fake traffic and block IP addresses after some time. Not to forget the blocklists which are also available for download.

Court Forbids Linking to Pirate Bay Proxies

Found on TorrentFreak on Saturday, 12 May 2012
Browse Censorship

The Court has forbidden the Dutch Pirate Party from linking to, operating or listing websites that allow the public to circumvent a local Pirate Bay blockade. The political party is further ordered to shutdown its reverse proxy indefinitely and block Pirate Bay domains and IP-addresses from its generic proxy.

The Court specifically ruled that the Party’s reverse proxy has to remain offline. It was further ordered that Pirate Bay domains and IP-addresses have to be filtered from the Pirate Party’s generic proxy. In addition the Pirate Party can’t link to other websites that allow the public to bypass the blockade.

So much for freedom of speech. Now the Pirate Party cannot tell its visitors to use OpenDNS, Google's nameservers, the MAFIAAFire plugin, VPN or other proxy services to get around this censorship which was ordered by a judge who, for what it looks like, has financial connections to the entertainment industry.

"A bizarre operation": Why West Virginia stuck $22,600 routers in tiny libraries

Found on ArsTechnica on Friday, 11 May 2012
Browse Hardware

West Virginia's Charleston Gazette has been hopping mad this week as one of its reporters learned that the state has been sticking 1,064 high-end $22,600 routers into “little public institutions as small as rural libraries with just one computer terminal.”

By the time someone in the state Office of Technology wrote in an e-mail that “this equipment may be grossly oversized for several of the facilities in which it is currently slated to be installed," it was too late.

"At the end of the day, I suspect we've made some mistakes," State Commerce Secretary Keith Burdette said this week. "I'm reading stuff in your stories and learning stuff in the process."

Seems like they are "learning stuff" a little too late in West Virginia. Usually, you do your homework before you pay $24 million, not afterwards.