DannyB's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the favorites dept
This week's "favorites" post comes from DannyB.
Having never done the favorite posts before, I wasn't sure if I should. Since I didn't have to
pee, I hope I made the right decision.
The best laugh all week was
Man Tries To Patent Godly Powers; Justifies It By Pointing To Software & Business Method Patents. That makes sense in an insane sort of way. Multiple forms of insanity combined. He forgot to mention aliens. 'Nuff said.
Speaking of patents: Congress Happy To Knock Out Patents That Impact Financial Institutions... But Everyone Else?. Don't worry. This is good news in disguise.
Precedent: You protected Johnny from bad patents, why not me too? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Microsoft To US Gov't: Hey, Only We Should Be Able To Use Patents To Shakedown Other Companies!. Nice hypocrisy there Microsoft. Live by the patent, die by the patent. (Apple, are you listening?)
56 pages of iTunes terms? Really? Can't we get a short version in one sentence? Try this: You agree to return to the Apple store each month and do whatever they tell you. I AGREE
Which brings me to
Music Service Simfy Files Complaint Over Apple Blocking Its iPad App. When you build a business on something controlled by a party with conflicting interests, be prepared to have the rug yanked out from under you. It's not the first time, and it won't be the last. (Disclaimer: Android fanboy talking.) Android lacks a single point of control. There are currently multiple Android app stores (e.g., Google, Amazon), with more on the way. (Will I get in trouble for saying "app store"?) If you don't like Google's store or its policies, approval process, etc, there is Amazon's store. More choice
(not less)
is a good thing.
I had to chuckle at
Former Obama Advisor Says Wikileaks Is Wonderful For The US Government. It's a shame the US government doesn't
understand the importance of anonymous public whistle blowing. Of course, maybe they do, but I'd rather not go there.
The next article was informative.
How Out Of Control Copyright Law Is Keeping Millions Of Books & Images Away From Scholars. I admit I had been one of those confused about the "science" and "arts" part of "useful arts and science". I didn't know copyrights were for science and patents were for useful arts. That profoundly affects what I think copyrights were intended to protect.
Next was Once Again, The Freedom Of Information Act Is Proving To Be Just That: An Act. If the Osama Bin Laden pictures are released, we learn nothing new. (Unless it would reveal something we didn't know! My mind races with possibilities if I go there.)
Otherwise, propaganda usage of the pictures is irrelevant.
Honest people could comply with FOIA.
If the government would act honestly most of the time, they would have credibility when they need to protect a secret.
Which leads to several ICE domain seizure favorites.
- The List Of Sites Challenging Domain Seizures
- Rojadirecta Sues US Government, Homeland Security & ICE Over Domain Seizure
- ICE Stalling On More FOIA Requests Concerning Domain Name Seizures
- Government working for private industry.
- Lack of due process, legal service, representation and response.
- Making a(nother) mockery of FOIA.
- Its ineffectiveness.
- Hurting unrelated subdomains; demonstrating a lack of understanding of how things actually work.
- Impacting sites outside the US.
Talk about the right hand of government not knowing what the left hand is doing. C'mon guys. Which do you want? The free flow of information or censorship and government control. It's a delusion to think you can have both.
I was happy to see continuing pushback on mass copyright infringement lawsuits and copyright trolling.
- From Two Nude Nuns Mass BitTorrent Lawsuits Down To None
- Judge Rules That Righthaven Lawsuit Was A Sham; Threatens Sanctions
- Denver Post Sued Over Righthaven Connection
- Those Who Settled With Righthaven Consider Taking Action; Righthaven Threatens Them With More Suits
Oh goodie. FBI Agents Getting More Power To Spy On People With Less Oversight. Why is this not surprising. CDA. DMCA. PATRIOT Act. ACTA. PROTECT-IP. Naked scanners. Patdowns. Controlling "rogue" websites. Government as a private police force, no due process. GPS tracking without due process. Making a joke of FOIA. Where does it end?
Maybe it just gets worse. US Trying To Extradite UK TVShack Admin Over Questionable Copyright Charges?. It turns out the US is not just trying, they're actually going to do it. Wow. The discussion on this topic says it all.
Summit Entertainment May Learn That You Can't File A Copyright Takedown Over A Trademark Issue. What to say? The title itself is the punch line. I hope that abuses of the DMCA starts resulting in some serious costs to the abuser.
Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos. I should be shocked. But I'm too numb from other government actions. Clearly the senators don't give the south end of a northbound rat.
What did we learn? People in government should be required to have a full bladder. Which brings me back to where I started. (Oh, gotta run now. . .)
Anomaly? Coincicence? Or does DMCA = Censorship?
The trolls will say that four major Hollywood studios simultaneously filing DMCA takedowns on a documentary they do not own is just an anomaly. A coincidence.
I might believe that if they didn't file bogus DMCA takedowns so often.
But even worse, I might believe it if FOUR OF THEM DIDN'T DO IT AT ONCE on a video that they do not like -- and do not own.
Coincidence? All four at once? Anomaly?
This was a deliberate and criminal act.
Re:
You do not need to have "Anonymous" in your nym in order to be a loudmouthed gay guy that calls Prenda lawyers idiots and their bosses scammers.
My nym doesn't have "anonymous" in it.
Re: Actually, had to shut down because of piracy!
DRM is not due to piracy.
DRM is due to a desire to control how you are allowed to use media. But most importantly DRM is to prevent new technology from gaining hold in the market, or at least control its growth.
Re: Actually, had to shut down because of piracy!
You can compete with free by adding value. See Microsoft, Apple, and Bottled Water.
If you can't compete with free, then you are a dinosaur and should not be in business.
It's happened before, and it will happen again
With music.
Microsoft created Plays For Sure. They partnered with third party media player makers, and with content owners.
Later Microsoft decided to copy Apple's strategy more closely. So Microsoft announced that they would be shutting down the DRM servers for Plays For Sure. Better get your content onto the final device you want to rest in peace on.
Next, Microsoft introduced the Zune. Microsoft is the only device vendor. Microsoft controls the store. Microsoft partners with content providers. This time you can trust DRM -- you won't get micro shafted -- for sure!
Later, Microsoft abandons Zune. So Microsoft announced that they would be shutting down the DRM servers for Plays For Sure. Better get your content onto the final device you want to rest in peace on.
Amazon and others have had episodes like this with ebooks and other content. There have also been episodes of purchased books magically being 'disappeared' from customer devices for various reasons.
Never trust DRM. Don't buy it. Don't participate. If they are 'selling' you something with DRM then you are getting screwed.
Rented or streaming content isn't quite as bad because it is clear up front that you are merely renting for a limited time, or are streaming while that content is offered and available.
Is it any surprise that physical DVD's seem to be disappearing from the market?
Re: Alternativly, the birth of 3 factor authenication
See my Prior Art post above. It covers all three of the most basic ways that you can authenticate.
Four, Five and other Poly-Factor authentication is just re-using one or more of the basic three factors.
1. Something you know (password, PIN, passphrase)
2. Something you have (ATM card, RSA fob device, building key, passport, etc)
3. Something you are (fingerprint, retina scan, voiceprint, DNA, how you type, pressure patterns of your handwriting, etc)
Re: Re: Re: Prior Art
> If that was the case that prior art should have been patented,
> and Kim would not have been issued with the patent in the first place.
That is outright not true in two different ways.
1. The prior art does not need a patent to prevent subsequent patenting. The prior art only needs publication.
2. Even if the prior art were patented this doesn't mean the broken USPTO wouldn't grant more patents on it. The more the merrier right?
Re: Re: Re: Prior Art
> so validity will not be discussed on TD.
It is being discussed on TD you troll.
Re: Re: "I believe in sharing knowledge and ideas for the good of society."
That.
That right there. It shows that those who love copyright so much don't even know what it is and what it is not.
Re: Prior Art
Just to add a bit more, the book describes why people use cryptography. One of the uses is to ensure privacy from government intrusion. The author even describes that one day this may be necessary even for citizens in the United States.
It's been a long, looooong time since I read the book, but I seem to recall it is on about page 100 (maybe 99, or 101), and it is long before September 11, 2001.
He describes that if there were a terrorist attack on the US, perhaps an large attack on, say, New York, that liberties and privacy may be curtailed severely.
Wow. He was quite insightful.
Like I said, it is an outstanding book. Also large, thick and heavy.
Prior Art
The book Applied Cryptography, an extensive work on the subject describes multiple-factor authentication.
The book describes that at the most basic level, you can prove your identity three ways:
1. Something you know (eg, password, PIN, etc)
2. Something you have (eg, building key, electronic fob, etc)
3. Something you are (eg, retina scan, fingerprint, voiceprint, etc)
Banks have used two factor authentication for years. An ATM wants something you Know (PIN) and something you have (plastic card).
The military often uses something you Are and something you Know. The guard must personally recognize you and you better know the password of the day. Failure may result in getting shot -- especially around nukes.
Google uses something you Know (password) and something you have (your mobile phone with a pre arranged app).
Re: Re: It's like Tethering all over again
You miss the point complete.
Going over your data plan limit is entirely unrelated to whether you can use your data for your phone or your laptop. You can do one without the other.
I used it a lot on my laptop and never went over my cap. Never came close.
Aren't the carriers supposed to warn you when you are getting close to your limit anyway? Didn't the FCC require this?
Re: Re: It's like Tethering all over again
That's what I did.
I used my own means to tether like there was no tomorrow and never heard diddly squat from AT&T. I didn't exceed my plan limit on data. In fact, I never usually even come close -- including when tethering.
Unfortunately, most people cannot just "use their own means" to implement tethering to a custom app.
It's like Tethering all over again
Treating Video as some sort of special use of data is as stupid as treating Tethering (to your laptop) as some kind of special use of data.
Data is like water. It's all potable. It all comes into the house over the same pipes.
I'm going to repost something I wrote earlier. Just replace all cases of Tethering with Video/Facetime/Hangouts/etc.
Quick Tethering Quiz.
Which costs more and which puts more stress on their network:
1. A 1 kilobyte packet transmitted between my phone and the tower.
2. A 1 kilobyte packet transmitted between my phone and the tower.
(Please note in the case of (1) the packet was from my mobile browser, and in the case of (2) the packet was from my laptop browser.)
If I have a 2 GB monthly data limit, which of the following activities will use more data on the network:
1. Downloading 2 GB of data to my mobile phone?
2. Downloading 2 GB of data to my laptop?
I have an interesting situation. My water utility sells me metered water for washing dishes, watering the lawn, showering, and other limited purposes.
The utility offers a Tasting plan for an additional monthly charge. Under this plan, I am allowed to use the water also for cooking and drinking. (Even though my water use is metered, and each gallon of water for cooking and drinking is delivered by the same pipes!)
Dear customer: our records indicate that you have been using water for cooking and/or drinking. Please upgrade your water rate plan to our convenient Tasting plan that allows for this usage. If you continue to use water for cooking and drinking, you will be signed up for the Tasting plan automatically.
I think the Tasting plan is just a fee that they made up. It isn't a service they provide. They just want more money from me. I've got a workaround of using a container to obtain water from another room for the purposes of cooking and drinking.
Some people shout: Theft of service!
But what service? They're already delivering water to me, and metering it, and I'm paying for it, and its delivered by the same pipes!
Some people shout: but you signed an agreement and using the water for cooking and drinking is a breach of that agreement!
Ask a lawyer about the term "unconscionable contract".
Nobody in their right mind would agree to this if they had any actual choice in the matter. Just because they have the power and can force you into paying this ridiculous fee or doing without doesn't make it right.
I say that this Tasting "service" is no service at all, it's just a fee for delivering nothing at all extra to me. It's a case of the utility wanting something for nothing. Yet people seem to think it is somehow wrong to use the water I'm paying for for drinking or cooking unless I sign up for the more expensive Tasting plan.
In order to add legitimacy to their Tasting plan, the water company says that the Tasting plan is actually delivering something: it includes an additional 2 Gigabytes of water per month, giving you 4 total Gigabytes of water.
But what if I only need 2 Gigabytes of water and therefore my existing monthly 2 Gigabyte plan is plenty? The water company already charges $10 per extra Gigabyte of water I use over the limit. So if I used excess water, it's not like they wouldn't get paid.
Furthermore, once I sign up for the Tasting plan, they don't make any distinction between water used for drinking/cooking and water used for other purposes. I could use 3/4 of it for tasting, and 1/4 for bathing/dishwashing. Or any other split. Or all of it purely for tasting. So then if I paid for Tasting and used only 2 Gigabytes of water, which I already had paid for, then why did I need the Tasting plan?
I seem to be very confused about stealing water for tasting. Someone please set me straight.
Re: How the mighty have fallen.
Some people say it began when we took prayer out of schools.
Others say the downfall of America can be traced back to when the Mars company introduced the blue M&M.
Re:
> I don't think anyone commenting has actually been hit with a
> water balloon. Hint: they hurt. A LOT. Yes that's assault.
So is an arrest and criminal record warranted? Is violence by police warranted?
How about just a suspension?
Clue: getting snapped by a towel in the shower hurts too, but I don't know anyone who got arrested and injured in a police takedown over it.
Re: Re: I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
Detainee: I downloaded a song that I already had bought on CD.
Re:
Don't think it couldn't happen. When the original Gestapo happened, I'm sure it took people by surprise.
History repeats. Human nature doesn't change.
Re:
This planet could be some other planet's hell.
Re: "no punishment too large" IS A FINE WITH OOTB
So are you saying that for any crime, no matter how small, there is no punishment too big?
Do you support capital punishment for pirates? What about for people guilty of playing their radio loudly enough to be considered a "public performance" without having a license for public performance?
Should enhanced interrogation techniques be used to find out of they know of any other students who may be planning to throw water balloons or play the radio too loudly?