An anonymous reader writes "The Associated Press reports that in a 2005 study the MPAA conducted through an outfit called LEK, the movie trade association vastly overestimated how much college students engage in illegal movie downloading. Instead of '44 percent of the industry's domestic losses' owing to their piracy, it's 15 percent — and one expert is quoted as saying even that number is way too high. Dan 'Sammy' Glickman's gang admitted to the mishap, blaming 'human error,' and promised 'immediate action to both investigate the root cause of this problem as well as substantiate the accuracy of the latest report.'"

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Downloading TV shows and movies is clearly becoming a competitive market as Netflix and Apple (as well as many others) start offering video on demand services. But with each new offering, it seems like viewers need a separate and proprietary piece of video playing software which is obviously aimed at enhancing the viewing experience for the audience. The DRM and the crazy number of different time limitations for how long you can watch you downloaded shows are really just bonus features. Imagine the glorious future of watching a la carte videos where every distribution channel has its own player and set of rules for how you can consume the content. Future DVRs will incorporate access control systems that would rival the most complex enterprise content management systems of today. I can't wait to click through dozens of end-user agreements just to watch my favorite time-shifted shows! Progress is great.

While my vision of the future for watching videos in the US will hopefully be averted due to competition with BitTorrent, the EU is facing a tangled web of content regulation right now. Each of the 27 members of the European Union currently has its own right to agree to content distribution deals with video vendors, creating a patchwork of regulatory requirements that will likely hinder the development of pan-European media services. The New York Times notes that this situation will likely benefit the IP lawyers in Europe over the next few years, as service providers and content owners battle over each country's legal requirements. While the European Commission is trying to create a more consumer-friendly set of regulations that every nation in the EU can agree to, it seems somewhat unlikely to happen in a timely fashion. The irony is that many of these video on demand services are aimed at giving consumers a legal alternative to piracy, but the red tape and legal disputes will be likely to point consumers to pirating until the dust has settled.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

cpudney writes "An article in Computerworld UK reports on a new open source analysis initiative launched by Hewlett-Packard. The FOSSology Project's mission is to 'build a community to facilitate the study of Free and Open Source Software by providing free data analysis tools.' The first such tool reports how an open source project is licensed. Rather than simply collecting a project's advertised license, the tool analyzes all of the source code for a given project and reports all of the licenses being used, based on the license declarations and tell-tale phrases that identify software licensing. A video demonstrating the tool applied to abiword is available. The FOSSology source code is licensed under GPLv2."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

For years, we've pointed to the bogus stats claimed by the MPAA concerning what kind of impact "piracy" is having. The stats incorrectly count "ripple effects" in a rather troubling manner. First, they only look at the ripple effects in one direction (those that hurt the movie studios). They don't bother to count ripple effects that go the other way (such as cheaper movies for everyone, allowing them to spend more money elsewhere, helping the economy). More importantly, though, using ripple effects is merely double, triple or quadruple-counting the actual losses, as Tim Lee brilliantly explained. Of course, that hasn't stopped reporters from citing these bogus stats as fact or politicians from using those stats to justify ridiculously awful legislation. Given all that, it's rather shocking to hear the MPAA finally admit that the stats in a recent report are bogus -- but only one specific number. Apparently, via some unexplained "human error," an MPAA study reported that 44% of "losses" due to piracy came from college campuses -- which explains the recent efforts to get new legislation forcing colleges to filter internet connections. However, the MPAA is now admitting that the real number is actually just 15%. The MPAA insists all the other numbers are perfectly fine, but didn't bother to address all of the criticisms of the methodology. This likely means that the mistake made here was so egregious that even the MPAA couldn't wait for the new legislation to pass before admitting the error. That alone, is fairly surprising. Hopefully, though, this will start convincing the press and politicians to be at least a little skeptical of numbers coming from biased industry associations.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Link to video by Pete Miser. (thanks, Luke McBride)

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Last November, EU regulators in the European Parliament's Committee on Culture and Education began looking at how culture affects the economy and recommended a 'balance between the opportunities for access to cultural events and content and intellectual property' saying that 'criminalizing consumers so as to combat digital piracy is not the right solution.' Industry lobbyists, of course, immediately sprang into action to try to turn that around, writing amendments that would set up mandatory ISP copyright filters and extend EU copyrights to match the USA's life-plus-70 term. Thankfully, the committee rejected all of those amendments: 'Clearly, they're not going to let the ITRE or the European recording industry push them around, which is great news for Europeans. Now if we could only get the US Congress to show as much spine as the French (ouch).'"

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

If Bill Clinton doesn't get off the campaign trail, other leading Dems should get out and stump for Obama, to level the field.

I said this on Twitter and Adam Wygle sent a pointer to this site, that says it better than I could.

22nd Amendment: "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice..."

As discussed a few months ago by Tom Lee, misguided anti-piracy requirements for universities found their way into the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007. Mostly, the nearly 800-page bill rehashes existing legislation regarding federal financial aid. However, a section titled "Campus-based Digital Theft Prevention" provides an unfortunate glimpse at what could be the new wave of legislation related to network filtering of copyrighted material inside and outside the academic domain, that’s waiting in the wings.

The bill, in its current form, outlines that eligible institutions "develop a plan for offering alternatives to illegal downloading or peer-to-peer distribution of intellectual property as well as a plan to explore technology-based deterrents to prevent such illegal activity." While advocates emphasize that the only requirement is to plan, the wording leaves the door to state mandated copyright protections in exchange for federal funding wide open... a truly backwards and illogical arrangement. In this case, congressional requirements will most likely take the form of industry-sanctioned DRM initiatives, in addition to network detection/filtering techniques laden with privacy risks and prone to the inevitable backlash of technological countermeasures.

The link between failing to draft plans and eligibility for at least some student financial aid programs is most troubling because it does not address the inherently complex nature of piracy and copyright infringement in the 21^st century. Instead it seeks to place the onus on university administrators, who are already in the midst of coming to grips with effective digital threat prevention. Introducing this type of government intervention does nothing to stimulate the desperately needed innovative solutions for the issues at hand. Also, from a policy perspective, the networks on campuses across the country differ mainly in scale from those governed by the likes of the Verizon and Comcast, meaning that a disconcerting and inappropriate model for anti-piracy legislative action is being shaped.

In the same way that universities provide an environment where some of the leading minds of the tomorrow’s society are shaped, specious legislative action that effects their rights as downloaders will impact their expectations of how privacy and civil liberties should be transposed to an increasingly digital world. It shouldn’t be left for the conspiracy theorists to suggest that this will begin the prying open of a Pandora’s Box of well-meaning public policy that falls short due to short-sighted intentions and narrow perspectives on the matters at hand.

Yet, in spite of these frightening possibilities combined with the fact that electronic piracy is fast on its way to becoming a hot-button issue, Congress doesn't appear to have any clue about the inappropriateness of these measures. That means, unfortunately, that it is unlikely they will support any sustained effort to remove the aberrant mandate. There are options that don't resemble placing economic sanctions on institutions of higher learning -- but it doesn't appear Congress is interested in pursuing them any time soon.

Alex Fletcher is an expert at the Techdirt Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Alex Fletcher and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

An anonymous reader writes "Symantec reported Tuesday that the first case of drive-by pharming, in which a hacker changes the DNS settings on a customer's broadband router or wireless access point and directs the link to a fraudulent Web site, has been observed in the wild. The first drive-by pharming attack has been observed against a Mexican bank: 'It's associated with an e-mail pretending to be from a legitimate Spanish-language e-greeting card company, Gusanito.com,' says Symantec Security Response principal researcher Zulfikar Ramzan. Inside the e-mail is an HTML image tag but instead of displaying images, it sends a request to the home router to tamper with it."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Dan Berninger, who I almost always agree with, has tossed out a suggestion for how tech companies can deal with situations like the one where Verizon was able to squeeze millions of dollars out of Vonage using patents that clearly never should have been granted, as there was tremendous amounts of prior art on the patents (much of which was brought to light by Berninger himself). His suggestion is that tech companies should create "a formal process of contributing software innovations to the public domain." It's one of those ideas that sounds good in theory, but won't work in practice. In the past, we've explained why similar ideas (such as a database of "obvious ideas" for the sake of prior art) will never work.

The main reason: if you're not in the business of generating patents, you generally don't think all of the little things you do are worth patenting or dropping into a database. They just seem obvious and natural, so you don't even bother. It's only in retrospect -- when someone else has patented the concept -- that people start to realize that they wish they had some sort of record of the obvious ideas they had or things they did years before the patent was filed. Sure, people will submit some ideas here or there, but it simply won't seem worth it to many people, especially on very minor things, or very broad things like setting up a hands-free kit in a car. That seems so obvious, why would you even think to patent it... or put it in a database of prior art? So, while it's a nice idea in theory, it will fail in retrospect, because the ideas and concepts that need to be in a database will seem so obvious that people won't bother entering them until it's too late and someone else already has the patent.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

The Nation has up a sobering article from its upcoming issue about how colleges and universities are being turned into homeland security campuses, in the name of preventing homegrown radicalization. Quoting: "From Harvard to UCLA, the ivory tower is fast becoming the latest watchtower in Fortress America. The terror warriors, having turned their attention to "violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism prevention' — as it was recently dubbed in a House of Representatives bill of the same name — have set out to reconquer that traditional hotbed of radicalization, the university."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Martha says,

Cotton Monster is the handy work of Jennifer Strunge. She creates amazing stuffed monsters in all sizes. Each one is a work of art and totally unique, as she uses no patterns. Her store is almost always sold out, but tomorrow there will be new monsters for sale.

Link, her online gallery also includes photos of giant-sized inflatable monsters.

Linnen writes in to note that one of developers of Sun's open source system tracing tool, DTrace, has discovered that Apple crippled its port of the tool so that software like iTunes could not be traced. From Adam Leventhal's blog: "I let it run for a while, made iTunes do some work, and the result when I stopped the script? Nothing. The expensive DTrace invocation clearly caused iTunes to do a lot more work, but DTrace was giving me no output. Which started me thinking... did they? Surely not. They wouldn't disable DTrace for certain applications. But that's exactly what Apple's done with their DTrace implementation. The notion of true systemic tracing was a bit too egalitarian for their classist sensibilities..."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Abdul Latif, beloved owner of the Ruplai Restaurant in Newcastle upon Tyne, has died at age 52. He was famous for his kindness (he offered free meals for five years to British soldiers who served in Iraq) as well as his "world's hottest curry," called Curry Hell. From an advertisement:

(Click on thumbnail for enlargement)

Anyone finishing the full portion of Curry Hell will not be charged for that dish. He or she will also be presented with a certificate of achivement. Anyone failing to finish the portion will be charged £6.95 for the dish. Should anyone die in the attempt, the cost of the dish will be incurred by the next of kin."

Mr. Latif and his establishment will not be responsible if your arsehole falls out the bottom of your trouser legs after eating Curry Hell.

If you have tried Curry Hell, please tell us about it in the comments.

Link (Via Nothing To Do With Arbroath)

Today I noticed that Ask ET (Edward Tufte’s forum) displays related articles in a very unique way.

People normally use tags to link related posts. If Ask ET used tags in a typical way, a post would look like this:

When you clicked on a tag, you might see a page like this:

This conventional method technically gives you access to the related articles. However there is a problem. You have to click the tag to discover what’s behind it. The Interface design tag in the first screenshot leaves a lot to the imagination. How do you know it’s worth clicking through to a whole ‘nother screen based on that two-word link? Most people wouldn’t bother, and they’d be missing out on good content.

Ask ET uses a totally different approach. Instead of linking to pages for each tag, it simply shows the tagged articles inline. No separate screens. No navigation. It’s a beautifully simple solution.

Click the image to see the actual design full-size:

I love how this layout removes a navigation step and puts the focus on the content. The list of related articles encourages you to wander through the site, like getting lost in Wikipedia. Individual article titles catch your eye. Just by passing over the list on your way to the article you might discover the Interface Hall of Fame/Shame or an article about email communication in the White House.

Sometimes we think we’ve got it all figured out as our websites settle into repeating the same patterns again and again. It’s great to see a fresh takes on a supposedly “solved” problem like how to link related articles.

Roland Piquepaille writes "The Tree of Life is an expression first used by Charles Darwin to describe the diversity of organisms on Earth and their evolutionary history. There are only two life forms, — eukaryotes, which gather their genetic material in a nucleus, and prokaryotes, such as bacteria, which have their genetic material floating freely in the cell. Until recently, eukaryotes, which include humans, were divided into five groups. But now, based on work by European researchers, the Tree of Life has lost a branch. After doing the largest ever genetic comparison of life forms they concluded that there are only four groups of eukaryotes."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Wireless technology knowitall Glenn Fleishman says,

I've been trying for months now to explain the bottom-to-top nature of what an open cell platform running on an open network would look like. Thanks to Apple, I can now use the iPhone location feature, which triangulates on both cell towers and Wi-Fi access points to produce geographical coordinates, to break out the chain of physical hardware up to applications and services that could be opened up under Android or other open phones and networks.

Link.

Paddy Dwyer writes "The comic book publisher Boom Studios announced about 2 weeks back that they were going to release the full first issue of a new comic called North Wind online free the exact same day as it was released in shops. They also plan to do this with the remaining 4 issues in the mini series. There was some retailer outcry when this was announced but it didn't last long. As the book quickly sold out with Diamond Comics Distributors. Then even though the book is still available online for free they are planning on doing a second printing to fulfill remaining back orders for the book. Also the book was released in CBZ format which is to comics what the mp3 is to music. There is no DRM and it is of very high quality."

This comes just a couple months after Tim Lee pointed out why comic book publishers should free up their content. He also discussed how the big comic book publisher, Marvel and DC have, instead, chosen to lock up their content and threaten people for sharing their books online. Yet, here we are, once again, with an example where the companies who embrace the ability to use free content as a promotion are finding that it actually helps them sell more.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story