Archive for: law
As if we didn’t already have enough pointless laws swirling through local and federal governments alike, New York and Arkansas would like to push the boundaries of stupidity with a new anti-media player while running law. Lawmakers from both states want to make it so that running is more or less treated exactly like driving in that you should be distraction free. Of course, to people with at least a few ounces of common sense, this is the dumbest thing you’ve ever heard. But to a politician who hasn’t been “in touch” with their “fan base” for years to decades, it’s nothing surprising. Hopefully common sense prevails and any such laws are turned down, buried, and never brought up again.
As for those who actually think it is needed — “I don’t see anybody being stopped to check what’s in their ears”, says Sen. Jimmy Jeffress. A little helpful tip for you Jimmy: if you don’t expect anyone to obey or enforce a law, there is absolutely no point in creating it in the first place. Our tax dollars hard at work…
Want to hear something stupid? Alrighty then — in Germany, private citizens will soon be able to be fined for open WiFi networks to the tune of 100 euros ($126 USD). No password, no money. Pretty straight forward. If you look at it at face value, it seems like the government protecting citizens from themselves (and their technological incompetence). But in reality it’s just the government sticking their nose where it doesn’t belong.
There are various environments and network setups that actually benefit and/or require open networks. So to say this ruling is troubling is an understatement. How this affects businesses remains to be seen as the ruling had more to do with the little guy (read: you and I). If the ruling does or will be extended to larger corporations and businesses, the effect on could be devastating depending on how their networks are set up…
As time moves along, it’s becoming more and more apparent that the little guy/end user is having more and more of their rights and freedoms taken away. For today’s depressing example, we’ll look at Sony and their continual effort to fuck over PS3 users.
Follow me inside for the joyous news…
You know, the audacity of the RIAA/MPAA astounds me. Not only do they lie about their general purpose in life, but they constantly push their personal profit seeking ways harder and further with each passing year. If you think the whole censorship/web monitoring thing in China is bad, the RIAA/MPAA’s new plans submitted to the Office of Intellectual Property Enforcement are enough to scare anyone. Have a look for yourself, here’s what those bastards want:
Google took the tech world by storm back in early January by stating (out of the blue I might add) that they were going to cease censoring search results in China and that if China pushed back, the California based company was going to pull out of China all together. Yet here we sit almost two months later and not much else has developed besides a few comments hurdled back and forth between the Chinese government and Google. To most, we’ve already written off Google’s future in China as pretty much finished. I mean, China is one of the most censored markets in the world whereas Google is one of the most outspoken on such policies — complete opposites. Consider it a pretty substantial surprise then that Google announced today, more or less “positive” negotiations with the Chinese government.
Today at a press conference in Abu Dhabi, CEO Eric Schmidt went ahead and stated that “while there was no set in stone time-table yet, he sees a resolution happening in the not too distant future”. Should we cheer? Or should we stand back, holding on to our truckload of caution? I’m siding with the latter for now. China isn’t exactly the negotiable type at the world table, nor have they every really shown that they care what the rest of the world thinks of them. But if there is any truth in Schmidt’s response, consider it one of the greatest revolutions in the modern technical era. If such a concession is made by the Chinese government, I will be generally intrigued to see how other companies follow suit.
Think there’s any chance Google can “win” in China?
Cnet News
[Image Source]
I don’t normally go too deep into politics here because (1) this isn’t a politics blog and (2)….I just don’t like politics. Pretty good reasons eh? Regardless of your knack for politics however, if there’s any ounce of interest in anything digital within your head, you should be at least a little interested/worried about ACTA (anti-counterfeiting trade agreement). The repercussions from such a law have truly wide ranging effects.
For those that don’t, the main gist is that it’s a bill being drafted to supposedly stamp out piracy and make the world a happier place. In actuality, it screws over legitimate users more than ever, complete removes rights of accused with a “shoot first, ask questions later” approaches, and blatantly echoes the wishes and rules of big corporate lobbyists more-so than the wants and needs of consumers. And of course, the fact that the government is fighting tooth and nail to keep ACTA locked up behind closed doors only means it’s a lose-lose situation for end users. All-in-all, ACTA is one of the worst crafted “tech bills” in the history of man, and the US government is trying their hardest to force it upon other nations, labeling those that don’t comply as “black-listed”. But there’s hope…
One of the stronger pro-copyright/IP places on the planet — the EU — has actually pulled quite the odd move. EU Parliament voted 663 to 13 against ACTA, citing that it went against various EU laws, one chief example being the Lisbon Treaty.
MEPs will go to the Court of Justice if the EU does not reject ACTA rules, including cutting off users from the Internet “gradually” if caught stealing content.
For a body of government and peoples who are generally much stronger on copyright law than we are here in the US, it’s a huge signaling that maybe, just maybe, a few politicians out there have some common sense.
I can only hope other countries come to their senses and recognize what a grave injustice and completely one-sided affair ACTA really is, and that the only people it benefits are those on the receiving end of the settlement payments. Keep speaking out folks, someone could actually be listening…
TechDirt > Euractiv
EU residents may want to write/call/email/text their local governments and let them know any bill or law that drops data retention limits from 12 months to 6 is a bad idea. Especially so because if it does pass, Google Street View will be no more. They’re stating that if data retention limits are lowered for the original unblurred images from twelve to six months, the accuracy, integrity, and overall usefulness will be dimished. After those 6-months, if Google wants fresh unblurred images, they’ll have to drive all over kingdom come again, resnapping life as it happens. The short answer would be to hire more Street View drivers to scan more often. But is that really the answer?
I just can’t see the reasoning behind the “privacy” motives if the images will still be online for many months at a time. What’s the difference in a screen capture from Street View whether it’s six or twelve months? Am I missing something here?
Bloomberg
- November 13, 2009 8:10 pm
Copyrights and other law topics aren’t really covered here a whole lot. It’s for good reason though. This is a tech blog aimed more at gadgets. But being the nerd that I am, I follow many more areas than just gadgets. Music copyrights and the whole music label tango that so many deal with on a daily basis interest me. We see daily how the digital world in which we love constantly gets lambasted by labels and content owners as the cause for declining music sales, the reason for sinking profits, and overall the start of the end of the world. Those facts have been disproven many times over but that doesn’t stop them from repeating the same sentences over and over. They claim that because of the digital age, copyrights need to be protected to a higher degree and more of them filed.
Thankfully for us the end user as well as artists, the end (or at least significant decline) of label control of the music scene is one that desperately needs to come. It seems like an implausible, almost laughable dream — that labels will lose their copyright with the artists getting back what is rightfully theirs. But it isn’t that far of a stretch. Thanks to a law passed in 1976 called the “U.S. Copyright Act of 1976″, artists will very soon be able to reclaim their property giving them the ability to succeed where the labels have failed time and time again — to properly manage, distribute, and market musical content in the digital age…
Seeing a headline mentioning anything geeky or tech based being banned often conjures up initial reactions of malice and disgust as such governments and government bodies that do such things do so for their own agenda — not the citizens’. With that in mind, hold off on any initial feelings you may have when hearing that the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs has banned prepaid cellphones in Kashmir and declared that any existing SIM cards with such plans not be renewed. Again, it’s deeper than it appears on the surface.
You may be thinking that the reason for such a band would be the government trying to muscle out competition with their own proprietary format/spec/cash cow. But that isn’t the case at all. The Ministry cites “security concerns” as the reason for the kibosh. Heck, even the vague and often misused term “security concerns” can be seen as a front for a deeper issue.
However, it is a legitimate concern as according to the Ministry, security checks and other procedures are not being properly followed leading to users getting multiple connections and carriers and cellular providers taking advantage of said customers. Plus it doesn’t help that Kashmir and Jammu lie on a heavily turbulent boundary line with Pakistan. Naturally terrorists and those that aren’t so friendly prefer prepaid, month-to-month deals as….well…they probably won’t be around to see the life of a multi-year contract. Now the reasons become more clear. Don’t they?
Just because here in America we are use to carriers and the government sticking up for big business pockets doesn’t mean every government follows suit. Any Indiana readers care to chime in on the pro’s and con’s of living with such a rule?
Cellular-News
{Image Source}
