FTC to Sony BMG: Decpetive DRM Will Not Be Tolerated

Sony BMG has settled with the FTC on charges that their CD copy protection scheme (i.e. rootkit fiasco) violated Ferderal Law. In a recent press release, FTC chairman Deborah Platt Majoras declared:

“Consumers’ computers belong to them, and companies must adequately disclose unexpected limitations on the customary use of their products so consumers can make informed decisions regarding whether to purchase and install that content.”

The settlement also:

• requires clear and prominent disclosure on the packaging of Sony BMG’s future CDs of any limits on copying or restrictions on the use of playback devices.
• bars the company from installing content protection software without obtaining consumers’ authorization
• bars Sony BMG from using the information on consumers’ listening preferences that it has already gathered through the monitoring technology it installed and bars them from using the information to deliver ads to those consumers
• requires Sony BMG to reimburse consumers up to $150 to repair damage that resulted directly from consumers’ attempts to remove the software installed without their consent.

This raises several issues:

1. How will consumers react t0 such labeling (assuming Sony BMG even bothers to reinstate this technology in a modified form) and;
   
2. Can the FTC's ruling be applied to DRM on a broader scale? If so, perhaps we may be following in Norway's footsteps sooner than we thought . . .
   

(via Video Business)

Google Censors Indian Military Sites

The Times of India reports that after Indian officials nearly banned Google Earth when they became aware that it gave users access to parts of India where there are sensitive military/government installations. As it turns out, Google was able to come to an agreement with the Indian government and will begin "electronically camouflaging" these sites so that users will not be able to find them unless they know exactly what they're looking for. Google will also distort the size and structure of sensitive buildings (or even add buildings where there are none) for freedom, glory, and justice.

I know Google is stuck in between a rock and a hard place on this one, but I'd like to think that if something like this came up in India or China they would take the heat instead of curbing. I guess some information is better than no information. Terrorists aren't going to use Google Earth to plan an attack on a government installation.

(Via theinquirer)

NY Student Takes on RIAA

After being sued by the RIAA saying he downloaded songs at age 11, Robert Santangelo has filed 32 charges against the Recording Industry. Along with his lawyer,

they have demanded a jury trial and filed a counterclaim against the companies for allegedly damaging the boy's reputation, distracting him from school and costing him legal fees. The record companies have engaged in a wide-ranging conspiracy to defraud the courts of the United States, the court documents say. Competitors in the recording industry are a cartel acting together in violation of the antitrust laws by bringing the piracy cases jointly and using the same agency "to make extortionate threats ... to force defendants to pay", our precocious teen wrote.

(article)

I say Good Luck!

Top 10 Worst "Big Brother" Companies

Business Intelligence Lowdown reports on the top 10 anti-privacy companies. Here's the list:

10. Response Unlimited
9. LexisNexis
8. AOL
7. Amazon.com
6. Yahoo!
5. Microsoft
4. Accenture
3. Acxiom
2. Google
1. ChoicePoint

See the article for details about how we're all getting pwned.

How to avoid such pwnage? One of the commentors of that article suggests using the TrackMeNot Firefox extension, which creates white noise search terms to hide your real search terms from MSN, Yahoo!, AOL and Google.

Schneier on Boston ATHF Insanity

Finally! A tie to the class that will let me post about my favorite story of this or any year. Bruce Schneier was on American Public Media's Weekend America radio show offering his opinions on the incident. He talks about a concept he coined called "security theater" - actions taken in the name of security that do nothing to actually improve security, only to make people feel safer - like the immediately-post 9/11 National Guard soldiers posted at airports with unloaded guns and "The War on Moisture". Also great is the clueless DHS spokeshole staying on message with regards to "irresponsibility" of the "pranksters." For the record, THIS IS NOT A HOAX. Neither the ad creators or Turner Broadcasting intended for the ads to be seen as a threat - the clueless public and public services of Boston did that all by themselves.

Link.

Responses to Viacom's Indiscriminant, Ridiculous DMCA Takedown Notices Begin to Appear

I have been wondering exactly how to even begin to cogently think about the
sheer audacity and absolute lack of regard for the law
shown by Viacom in sending 100,000 DMCA takedown notices for a little while now. Before I could, however, Cory did all of the thinking - and subsequent fuming - for me.

And Google can take steps now to reduce that load: sue the living shit out of Viacom. We've got precedent -- the Diebold debacle -- for the idea that abusing the DMCA takedown process is illegal. Courts have been willing to punish this kind of excess by awarding fees and damages.

Now it turns out more and more people have had their videos taken down by these nastygrams. From Harvard Law prof John Palfrey:

In an e-mail from .sg, (which she said I could republish), Jaegercat writes: “My video ‘Beat Police’, an original work, was one of the ones on which Viacom is claiming copyright. … My video used to be here but is also here (and clearly not Viacom copyright). … The video itself took me 5 months to make. It containes 3D models made by third-parties, each of which is used with permission. … The song was written and performed by my husband and has no third-party components. … And yes, I can prove all of this as I have all original working files, and all of the licences giving right-to-use. … The video itself was shown in a film festival last year, as an original work, and the defamation in the Viacom/Youtube statement could therefore cause me real damage."

Link.

Crazy EULA #2: Microsoft Says No To Vista Virtualization

From the Microsoft Anti-Competition files: a new EULA for Vista disallows use of certain versions of the new OS with virtualization software like the popular Parallels. The software allows for an OS and its applications to run inside another OS (personally I use Parallels to run AUTOCad on my MacBook Pro):

For Vista Home Basic and Home Premium Editions:
“USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.”

Even the Ultimate Edition does not allow use of certain apps. At the risk of sounding fanboyish, is this a way to stick it to OS X users who want to have the best of both worlds?

Link (via TAUW)