<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;disabled&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2012 03:16:58 PDT</pubDate>
<title>US Steadfast In Its Stand For Publishers Against The Disabled</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121018/02104720747/us-steadfast-its-stand-publishers-against-disabled.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121018/02104720747/us-steadfast-its-stand-publishers-against-disabled.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've talked a few times about how the US seems to be leading the charge to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120725/03494019823/obama-administration-stalls-treaty-to-help-blind-effort-to-appease-big-publishers-aka-campaign-donors.shtml">block</a> a treaty that would increase the ability of blind and other disabled people to get around copyright restrictions to access certain works.  The treaty has been in negotiations for ages -- and the US position has, at times, flip-flopped.  However, now it seems firmly aligned with copyright maximalist lobbyists.  The latest report from the negotiations is that publishers and the movie studios have <a href="http://www.keionline.org/node/1569" target="_blank">convinced US negotiators to push back on this treaty</a>:
<blockquote><i>
The United State is playing a big major role, and led by David Kappos' USPTO, generally is aligned with the publishers in efforts to narrow the agreement and limit its benefits to persons with disabilities, and is increasingly isolated in its opposition to a decision that the nature of the "instrument" will be a treaty rather than a softer non-blinding recommendation or model law. One major objective of the US delegation is to exclude persons who are deaf. Another is to limit the exceptions to text, and exclude any audiovisual content or related rights. <b>Both of these negotiating objectives are designed to keep the U.S. movie and television industry happy</b>. The U.S. has also been seeking ways to support other publisher friendly provisions, even when they run counter to the robust exceptions found in U.S. law. 
</i></blockquote>
Siding with big studios and publishers over the best interests of the blind and the deaf?  How nice...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121018/02104720747/us-steadfast-its-stand-publishers-against-disabled.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121018/02104720747/us-steadfast-its-stand-publishers-against-disabled.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121018/02104720747/us-steadfast-its-stand-publishers-against-disabled.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>bad-news</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121018/02104720747</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 01:34:59 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Disgruntled Ex-Auto Dealer Employee Hacks Computer System To Disable Over 100 Cars</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100317/2215398608.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100317/2215398608.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Ah, the fun of the electronic age.  A few years back we started hearing about tools to remotely disable a car.  These were talked about as a security system to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091021/1759416629.shtml">recover stolen vehicles</a>, but also as a device to put on leased cars, in case they need to be repossessed.  Of course, once you put that technology on the car, what's to stop someone from abusing it?  Turns out that a disgruntled ex-employee of a car dealership that put such a technology on its cars, was able to log into the computer system using a former co-workers account and then started <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/hacker-bricks-cars/?utm_source=feedburner&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=Feed%3A wired27b %28Blog - 27B Stroke 6 %28Threat Level%29%29" target="_blank">methodically targeting the cars that used that system</a>:
<blockquote><i>
Ramos-Lopez’s account had been closed when he was terminated from Texas Auto Center in a workforce reduction last month, but he allegedly got in through another employee’s account, Garcia says. At first, the intruder targeted vehicles by searching on the names of specific customers. Then he discovered he could pull up a database of all 1,100 Auto Center customers whose cars were equipped with the device. He started going down the list in alphabetical order, vandalizing the records, disabling the cars and setting off the horns.
</i></blockquote>
Good thing he wasn't fired from a hospital that used <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050224/1012219.shtml">internet-connected pacemakers</a>, huh?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100317/2215398608.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100317/2215398608.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100317/2215398608.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>welcome-to-the-new-world</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100317/2215398608</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>