Related
An interesting article that I came across today; bolded some points that struck me as dangerous grounds ...
Sound Check by Alan Cross
February 12, 2010 12:30 a.m.
Back in November, I wrote about ACTA, the secret anti-counterfeiting trademark agreement involving Canada, the U.S., Mexico, the EU and nine other countries. Representatives have been meeting behind closed doors for two years to hammer out a treaty that will inevitably affect every single person on the Internet.
Yet there has been almost zero transparency. None of the draft texts have been made public and those outside the inner circle are bound by tough non-disclosure agreements.
This doesn’t mean there haven’t been some leaks.
Aside from measures to fight counterfeiting, there have been discussions about a worldwide “three strikes” rule. Accused (not caught, proven or convicted) of file-sharing music three times by an aggrieved rights holder, and you’re banned from the Internet. For life.
Internet service providers and telecoms would be liable for copyright infringements by their users. To avoid prosecution, that means they’ll have to find some way of sniffing through all the data — YOUR data — that passes through their pipes. And even though you may have a legitimate right to, say, ship a music file from point A to point B, there’s the potential for red flags at the ISP. Accused three times (not caught, proven or convicted) and you’re done. Not just with your current ISP, either. They’ll be required by international law to publish your name to an Internet no-fly list that will prevent you from ever having an Internet account in your name ever again.
And it gets better. Within the document is a second called Border Measures. There’s the real possibility that some border guard will have the power to make you prove all those music files on that iPhone in your pocket are, in fact, not pirated. Can’t do it? Bye-bye, iPhone. Oh, and you could be charged and fined.
This is more than just file-sharing for stopping fake Louis Vuitton bags. It’s about privacy, civil liberties, and legitimate use of the Internet for commerce and innovation.
The seventh round of negotiations is underway in Mexico — secretly, of course, partly because U.S. President Barack Obama has declared this an issue of national security. Same thing for the next round in April in New Zealand.
And because this is an international treaty, it’ll just be rubber-stamped into law. No public debate.
Be informed. Read what the Electronic Frontier Foundations says at eff.org/issues/acta.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sources:
http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/com...ifetime-ban-from-the-internet-it-could-happen
http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/comment/article/509570--the-orwellian-plan-to-track-your-music
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/06/02/copyright-bill-clement-montreal.html?ref=rss
http://www.eff.org/issues/acta
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement
Updates:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqE8SuLOQxo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2XPiqhN_Ns&annotation_id=annotation_910879&feature=iv
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=210429284986#!/group.php?gid=210429284986&ref=nf
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10467337-38.html
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/03/your-life-will-some-day-end-acta-will-live-on.ars
http://news.google.com/news/more?um=1&cf=all&ned=us&cf=all&ncl=d7q9CZNjAmTXtvMz0xI_8sjNmJ6cM
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=6275575&postcount=40
* EDIT *
FYI; the EFF is a good starting point for those who decide they want to do something - they may also be able to recommend an equivalent organization in your country.
thats pretty messed up. if it happens in the us, im sure itll end up in the supreme court and declared unconstitutional. this is way above what the powers the constitution granted to the government. after all, the government needs consent of the people or else its not a democracy anymore.
Unfortunately, since ACTA is considered to be an International treaty, it can be passed into law without public debate.
... and that's just the "tip of the iceberg". All one has to do is imagine the scenarios and since most of the treaty is being kept confidential, we don't know how far the reach and impact of the treaty will be. Here's a few other ongoings that most folks aren't aware of:
Rein In ACTA: Tell Congress to Open the Secret IP Pact
https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=420
In The News: Cellular User Privacy at Risk
http://www.eff.org/press/mentions
Control is arriving to internet...
Wow,
It is amazing about this article.
I really hope this won't succeed, as this trespasses the limits of control and privacy.
As next meeting will be here in México, I´ll try to fond out more locally...
Wow, definately hope this is a No Go
If this has any truth to it, yet another reason why i hate obammer
I get the feeling though that for every ISP that followed the no-fly list, another ISP like Google's new high speed internet would let someone on that list connect.
It reminds me of "Home Taping Is Killing Music. And It's Illegal" campaign.
And a opposing campaigns called,
"copyright is killing music - and it's legal"
"Home Taping is Skill in Music"
"Home Taping Is Killing the Music Industry: Killing Ain't Wrong"
Hope this doesn't become a law. If so, we may have to migrate to Iran (where there is no copyright law).
zizou417 said:
I get the feeling though that for every ISP that followed the no-fly list, another ISP like Google's new high speed internet would let someone on that list connect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let's say for the sake of argument that this treaty is passed ...
As the majority of services are paid via credit card or pre-authorized bank debit, it would seem to me that the person would never be able to get another Internet service under their true identity. Speculating further, the "no-fly" list would likely contain name, address, location, financial, and possibly other government information that establishes a person's unique identity - passport, birth certificate, etc. Some questions that come to mind:
Would this mean that the person would be banned from using cellular or other dial-up means to connect to the Internet?
Should the person use someone else's identify, would they be exposed to criminal prosecution and would the person who's identity was used be banned as well?
Taking it one step further; let's say some disgruntled person or company decides they want to shutdown a competitor, website, or other person, all they need to do is report the key stakeholder anonymously to the authorities (or governing body) a sufficient number of times so as to exceed the threshold ... and voila, banned! In a matter of a few calls, a person such as the owner of a website could be banned from accessing the Internet therefore taking down their website in the process.
Furthermore, countries could be "strong-armed" into adopting the treaty if they wish to conduct commerce over the Internet with countries that are part of the treaty.
I think, it is less likely that some thing like this treaty coming into existence.
I do not know about other developed countries. But, in developing and underdeveloped countries, virtually everyone uses the internet to share the music,movie,software.... So, if you ban all the people form the internet what business these ISPs and e-commerce people are going to do?
And you know, the major market are these countries due to their population. So, developed countries doesn't want to jeopardize their market.
May be, a stricter law to curb such copyright infringement can be applied. But, I hardly see effectiveness of these laws in developing and underdeveloped countries.
(May be China is more happier to apply such law and ban everyone form the internet. Which it is already doing with different means ).
What a "Brave New World" we live in..
hmmmmm, interesting read. Don't agree with this to be honest, but not much I can really do....... I wonder if this could be applied to spammers
raghu13uk said:
I think, it is less likely that some thing like this treaty coming into existence.
I do not know about other developed countries. But, in developing and underdeveloped countries, virtually everyone uses the internet to share the music,movie,software.... So, if you ban all the people form the internet what business these ISPs and e-commerce people are going to do?
And you know, the major market are these countries due to their population. So, developed countries doesn't want to jeopardize their market.
May be, a stricter law to curb such copyright infringement can be applied. But, I hardly see effectiveness of these laws in developing and underdeveloped countries.
(May be China is more happier to apply such law and ban everyone form the internet. Which it is already doing with different means ).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed; but how does one determine a true copyright violator? And obviously, it won't stop at audio and/or video. And what is the purpose of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) then? Was that act not supposed to be for this purpose? And how many companies/people are aware that the ACTA treaty is in the process of being finalised behind "closed doors"?
Of additional interest is the provision to empower border security such that they can search any/all electronic equipment. As the article points out, this means that no information is confidential. So if one happens to encounter a border security person having a "bad day", one could be faced with confiscation of their cellular phone or laptop as a result of not being able to prove that the information found on the device was legitimately paid for (ex: audio, video, application). Attempting to retrieve a wrongly confiscated item is costly both legally and personally.
Additionally, there are numerous articles on the Internet that already highlight the fact that most authorities have the means to bypass most encryption algorithms so as to extract the contents of hard drives and cellular devices. In some countries, it is even a federal offense to use certain depths of encryption - for the longest time, France only permitted 40-bit encryption.
Imagine this scenario;
You're browsing the Internet while waiting for your flight. You happen to connect to a compromised website which redirects you to several pornographic websites. An announcement over the PA system announces that your flight has been moved to a different gate and you realize that the gate is at the opposite end of the airport.
You close your laptop, stuff it in the bag and rush to the new gate just in time to see that people are boarding the plane. You board the plane, stow you laptop and later during the flight, you turn it on to do some work and then stow it away again forgetting to clear your history and browser cache.
When you arrive at your destination, border security instructs you to provide your electronic devices for scanning. During the scan, they discover the browser cache full of pornographic images.
Now what?
Imagine this other scenario;
What happens if this treaty provides large corporations with the power they require to close down websites that are considered hostile to their revenue or websites that provide information on how circumvent mechanisms that are in their products? And what happens if the treaty empowers the authorities to obtain all of the trace-back information of all of the people who frequented such a website so as to ban/prosecute them?
If they do this, i'm gonna sue someone important!!!
I would NOT want to see this thing passed. It's our internet, and they don't have the right to kick us off of it. Watch this video on the topic here, this one is more likely to happen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqE8SuLOQxo
What happened to that law that stated we could use any type of music/media as long as we don't make a profit on it?! this is so wrong imo. Sorry saw this thread and had to join.
I would much rather see tax dollars going to matters of national security, and helping the job market right now, then pay for big expensive servers that dedicate their time to crawling through everyone's internet, filtering out everything that's deemed "bad." What if you have say, a niece or nephew, that comes over to your house frequently and gets on the computer. They in turn download music, or go a a forbidden website, or something stupid like that, more than a few times. Bam! Your banned for life because of your brother or sister's child's mistake? I would be furious.
I can not see this going into effect without a HUGE public uproar. From us, as consumers, but also from the ISP companies. They will start taking HUGE revenue losses because of this.
Oh, and the border filtering... you've GOT to be freakin kidding me, right? Before I say any of this, let me make it perfectly clear that I am no racist. I either love, or hate people based on their personalities and actions. Okay, not a racist? Understood. Okay. Why not, instead of filtering electronic devices through the borders, they protect the borders a little better? I'm all of immigration, let them all come over, if they want, but make them do it the legal way. That's all. If that technology filter is applied at our borders, then I can see a huge uproar from a lot of racists, and non-racists, in the Texas, California areas.
There are way too many holes in this. It'd be like trying to hold water in a mesh container. In it's current state, there's no way this will be effective.
2012: The Year The Internet Ends
This will happen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2XPiqhN_Ns&annotation_id=annotation_910879&feature=iv
Badwolve1 said:
If they do this, i'm gonna sue someone important!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You won't be alone, let's make it a Class Action lawsuit!
I'm sure there will be plenty of constitutional lawyers ready to pounce on this one...
Ok, so I figured this would be the best place to post this. This directly relates to EVERYONE here.
If this lawsuit gets passed we are ALL screwed. Essentially, Sony is trying to get a case passed against some security researchers that have been able to "jailbreak", "root", "reimage" their PS3s so that they can once again put an "OtherOS" on like when they originally released. BUT, they are not stopping their, they are trying to get a precedent passed that would allow a device manufacturer to bring legal actions against people for modifying their devices AFTER they have purchased them. Meaning, in our case, if you buy a phone and modify the OS from exactly what the manufacturer has "approved" YOU are committing a CRIMINAL OFFENCE.
I SAY "F-YOU SONY!!!"
This is directly from the EFF, Electronic Frontier Foundation, if you are unaware of who they are or what they do I stress to everyone here that you learn a little about them from www.eff.org.
January 19th, 2011
Sony v. Hotz: Sony Sends A Dangerous Message to Researchers -- and Its Customers
Commentary
Co-authored by Corynne McSherry and Marcia Hofmann
For years, EFF has been warning that the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act can be used to chill speech, particularly security research, because legitimate researchers will be afraid to publish their results lest they be accused of circumventing a technological protection measure. We've also been concerned that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act could be abused to try to make alleged contract violations into crimes.
We've never been sorrier to be right. These two things are precisely what's happening in Sony v. Hotz. If you have missed this one, Sony has sued several security researchers for publishing information about security holes in Sony’s PlayStation 3. At first glance, it's hard to see why Sony is bothering — after all, the research was presented three weeks ago at the Chaos Communication Congress and promptly circulated around the world. The security flaws discovered by the researchers allow users to run Linux on their machines again — something Sony used to support but recently started trying to prevent. Paying lawyers to try to put the cat back in the bag is just throwing good money after bad. And even if they won — we'll save the legal analysis for another post — the defendants seem unlikely to be able to pay significant damages. So what's the point?
The real point, it appears, is to send a message to security researchers around the world: publish the details of our security flaws and we'll come after you with both barrels blazing. For example, Sony has asked the court to immediately impound all "circumvention devices" — which it defines to include not only the defendants' computers, but also all "instructions," i.e., their research and findings. Given that the research results Sony presumably cares about are available online, granting the order would mean that everyone except the researchers themselves would have access to their work.
Not content with the DMCA hammer, Sony is also bringing a slew of outrageous Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claims. The basic gist of Sony's argument is that the researchers accessed their own PlayStation 3 consoles in a way that violated the agreement that Sony imposes on users of its network (and supposedly enabled others to do the same). But the researchers don't seem to have used Sony's network in their research — they just used the consoles they bought with their own money. Simply put, Sony claims that it's illegal for users to access their own computers in a way that Sony doesn't like. Moreover, because the CFAA has criminal as well as civil penalties, Sony is actually saying that it's a crime for users to access their own computers in a way that Sony doesn't like.
That means Sony is sending another dangerous message: that it has rights in the computer it sells you even after you buy it, and therefore can decide whether your tinkering with that computer is legal or not. We disagree. Once you buy a computer, it's yours. It shouldn't be a crime for you to access your own computer, regardless of whether Sony or any other company likes what you're doing.
Finally, even if the researchers had used Sony's network, Sony's claim that it's a crime to violate its terms of use has been firmly rejected by courts in cases like United States v. Drew and Facebook v. Power Ventures. As those courts have recognized, companies like Sony would have tremendous coercive power if they could enforce their private, unilateral and easy-to-change agreements with threats of criminal punishment.
Sony's core arguments — that it can silence speech that reveals security flaws using the DMCA and that the mere fact of a terms of use somewhere gives a company permanent and total control over what you do with a device under pain of criminal punishment — are both sweeping and frightening, and not just for gamers and computer researchers. Frankly, it's not what we expect from any company that cares about its customers, and we bet it's not what those customers expect, either.
Attachment Size
Sony_Complaint.PDF 2.59 MB
Sony_Motion_For_TRO.pdf 207.03 KB
Related Issues: Coders' Rights Project, DMCA, Free Speech, Innovation, Terms Of (Ab)Use
Related Cases: Facebook v. Power Ventures, US v. Drew
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
looks like they wont be releasing the bootloader for the x10 any time soon....
Next thing you know car manufactures will be trying to get legal approval so if somebody modifies the car in anyway they will be committing criminal offense.........yeah right! lol
But seriously, we pay so much money for a device and not being able to modify it freely is just dumb. Personally I would sell those devices and not bother to buy any anymore since I wouldn't want to support such a company with such a attitude.
I think it is kinda fun.
As I jumped to the page I had been logged out and what was the add that was displayed in my original post??
Discounts on PS3s, games, and move. Ironic, dontchya think??
LOL
Actually even if sony wins it will only apply to consoles (for now), but if they lose the legal precedent will be changed from allowing mobile phones (a closed system) to be modified to allowing game consoles, mobile phones, and who knows what else. This is a bit of old news if you keep up on the psp/ps3 scene though but still interesting and at times funny. If you guys want to see the guy in question here http://www.ps3-hacks.com/2011/01/14/attack-of-the-show-with-geohot/ it's the same guy who jailbroke the iphone for the first time. He beat apple before, now let's see sony go down and even more systems open up legally.
But seriously, we pay so much money for a device and not being able to modified freely is just dumb.
start getting use to it now
it used to be that the huge companies couldnt stop people from hacking, so they just kept tabs on it and used the threat of losing your account as 'leverage'.
now that they have the upper hand, the law will work with them much more.
sony always had the updates trick. again, they couldnt stop people hacking, but the hackers couldnt hide it either, so a new update messed up your hacks and sometimes your device.
now they are gonna give you all hell...
you think sony wants you to play your own mp3s and watch your own videos???
if sony had the power to stop you eating food that you didnt buy through playstation, they would happily watch you starve to death.
its the entertainment industry. key word: industry, ie, to make money.
if they made a better device, with more fair options instead of trying to milk everyone dry, then they would gain so much from the people like me (and millions others) that dont want to give them our money because they are ****s.
I bet they'd make a lot more money if they allowed modifications, and supported them (for a price!)
wow... if they did that android devices would go extinct... theyre barely functional without mods
You guys are missing the point. If sony wins it only applies to systems not already in the DMCA which right now says "mobile phones". We're safe regardless unless you're also into console/handheld modding. Sony is just throwing a hissy-fit because their security got bent over a barrel.
I though people jailbroke the PS3 so they can play PS2 games because, you know, the PS3 can't do that.
j/k I think this is a bad move by Sony. How is jailbreaking a console any different than jaibreaking a mobile phone? Someone please explain that to me.
kizzmyanthia said:
...they are trying to get a precedent passed that would allow a device manufacturer to bring legal actions against people for modifying their devices AFTER they have purchased them. Meaning, in our case, if you buy a phone and modify the OS from exactly what the manufacturer has "approved" YOU are committing a CRIMINAL OFFENCE.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what if i steal a phone, and modify it, or if someone gives it to me as a gift
corporation > human
so
money > human
thats how it is nowdays
btw didnt apple try the same thing with jb-ing and they ruled jb is legal but voids warranty at the end ?
are u some apple fanboy or ur head just got pulled out of something warm and moisty ?
souljaboy said:
corporation > human
so
money > human
thats how it is nowdays
btw didnt apple try the same thing with jb-ing and they ruled jb is legal but voids warranty at the end ?
are u some apple fanboy or ur head just got pulled out of something warm and moisty ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Methinks the jailbreak precedent makes it impossible for Sony to get any traction in this case. The jailbreak precedent has been set in stone and the judges have already tossed out cases involving jailbreaks.
The only winners in this case will be lawyers.
sakai4eva said:
Methinks the jailbreak precedent makes it impossible for Sony to get any traction in this case. The jailbreak precedent has been set in stone and the judges have already tossed out cases involving jailbreaks.
The only winners in this case will be lawyers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thankfully you're right. This has been covered by the cydia case.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
I didn't see a post for this elsewhere (though some may recall that I have an exceptional ability to miss the obvious ), and you will not hear about this on the news, and it's barely even being covered in print or online. I'm usually too much of a cynic to bother with this sort of activism but this is a big deal, so please grant me 5 minutes of your time; you won't regret it.
The big deal? The "Stop Online Piracy Act" (SOPA). Well wait now, that doesn't sound so bad. We all download music for free here and there, maybe use an "extended trial" of Photoshop, but we know that piracy is technically stealing...so this can't be that bad, right? Wrong. Horribly wrong.
The fact that no news agency is covering this is absolutely insane. We criticize countries like China and Iran for censorship, but at least they don't attempt to conceal it within a vague anti-piracy bill. It is no exaggeration to say that this is one of the most significant bills to come through congress in the past decade, and most people don't even know it exists; much less that discussion began on it today. Of those that do know about it, half of them don't understand why it's a bad thing because H.R.3261 has such an innocuous name (it is also called the Protect IP Act of 2011 in the Senate). Don't be fooled.
"American Censorship Day" - Information on the Internet Blacklist BillsI urge you to take the time to educate yourself on H.R.3261 "SOPA" and write and/or call your Senators and Congress(wo)men! I guarantee if you spend 10 minutes reading about this, you will understand why I'm using an annoyingly large, bright red font.
The Wikipedia Article has a brief section ("Supporters") that shows--in a nutshell--how some politicians are deceptively framing this as a "pro-jobs" bill, among other pleasant sounding things; this couldn't be further from the truth. This is, in a manner of speaking, trying to apply archaic copyright laws to a 21st century Internet, rather than taking the effort to rewrite the copyright laws to make sense in the modern world.
You can find a lot of information explained very well at "American Censorship Day" website (scroll down past the petition), and I would encourage you to do your own research as well. Sign the petition if you want, but really, it is considerably more effective to call or write (or both!) your representatives.
A few more good links:
"Contacting The Congress" - Easily lookup the names/contact information of your Reps/Senators.
SOPA Wikipedia Article - References - These references link to a variety of websites/articles that are both for and against this bill. I would like to personally point out how most of those in support are entities of a political nature, while those against are largely non-political technology-oriented entities.
Full Text of H.R.3261 [PDF] - A relatively "short" 78 pages.
Hearing Information - House Judiciary Committee - This bill is on "the fastrack," meaning its authors are trying to push it through as quickly as possible...This hearing is where the bill began it's journey today (11/16/11).
I thank you for taking the time to read this; if you choose to reply to this thread, bash me as much as you like, but please keep your responses to each other civil.
Alright, back to rooting my Revo (before doing so is a felony ).
Sincerely,
James
Good stuff the masses don't even realize how important this is
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
Basically when this bill passes we have no freedom of speech on the internets. The US government can block websites hosted on servers outside it's borders. And you can get sued for having a song playing on the radio heard in your video posted online.
jaszek said:
Basically when this bill passes we have no freedom of speech on the internets. The US government can block websites hosted on servers outside it's borders. And you can get sued for having a song playing on the radio heard in your video posted online.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is ridiculous we must stop them!
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
Must stop big brother government before it's too late!
Its getting near time for the guns to come out boys...
Brb, there are strange men in suits at my door....
Sent from my SGH-T959V using XDA App
Great Job was about to post something about this on here but you beat me to it anyway here are some more links to articles,info and petitions:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-segal/stop-the-internet-blackli_b_739836.html
*
http://americancensorship.org/
http://demandprogress.org/blacklist/*
http://demandprogress.org/blacklist/?referring_akid=a2655379.916925._mXAo4&source=auto-taf
P.S keep spreading the word guys!
I think XDA should censor their logo/ and or have the javascript popup to support it http://americancensorship.org/
I have done it to my website for support purposes. come on guys we need this to be halted! So if you have a website/ blog please join the movement and censor your website for a day!
I guess this is the day when we finally found out for sure that govenments can be bought and paid for by greedy corporations.
You are now no longer being ruled by an elected body, but by a fat-cat in a pin-stripe suit.
This is the new world order i guess.
Very well written. I know quite a bit about this topic, since we will get something called "vorratsdatenspeicherung" where I live (austria). Basically The government logs your internet connection and it logs when and who you call/write a sms/ send an email and where you were by doing that.
Should be published on the portal!
I do what i want, because I can.
THIS IS CRAZY
This has to be one of those interpretation of the law issues though surely? I mean... you can't be prosecuted for lying on a dating profile about your height, weight, age etc. There'd be nobody left on match.com
Mykocorum said:
This has to be one of those interpretation of the law issues though surely? I mean... you can't be prosecuted for lying on a dating profile about your height, weight, age etc. There'd be nobody left on match.com
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The way the law is written does allow for scenarios like the one you propose. The retort of the politicians is, "We won't ever (ab)use this power for doing stuff like that, never ever." I don't know about you, but that's not too reassuring for me. If it's not abused now by these politicians, it'll be abused later by future politicians. Not to mention the precedent it sets...Once you give the government a little bit of control, it becomes very easy for them to get a lot of control.
Even if this were solely an interpretation of the law issue I'd still be against it, because Congress shouldn't be writing laws that can be so easily misinterpreted.
A link to the full text is up there, I plan on reading it tomorrow.
I totally agree the law should be written so that there is no room for interpretation.. you know if what you are doing is illegal from day one, ignorance is not a defence, but as devils advocate the counter is that you end up with thousands of very specific laws for hundreds of situations whilst occurrences the lawmakers didn't think of at the time are getting through loopholes and running away.
Circumstantially you should really be able to use the end purpose of why you are doing what you are doing as to the criminality of what's going down. I don't think anyone on this board would argue that a 40 year old man pretending to be a 13 year old girl on a forum or website to talk to other teenagers should be made illegal and is a very wrong thing - but who hasn't said they are two inches taller on a dating profile or put their build down as "athletic" rather than "a few extra pounds"
Bear in mind that the UK equivalent to this, the 'Digital Economy Act' was passed into law some time ago with barely a whimper of protest. Just like ProtectIP, it was kept quiet and barely reported on until it was too late. We just woke up one morning to draconian new laws. Again, it was bought and paid for by big media.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Economy_Act_2010
I doubt anything can be done to stop the same happening in the US, but perhaps enough pressure can be brought to bear to force some changes to the act. At least you guys have advanced warning to do something about it.
Edit: Big Content stacks Senate Committee
"US Senators have done their level best to give Big Content the law it wants to basically lock up citizens who might think of piracy or file sharing without having to worry about that pesky thing called constitution. The House Judiciary Committee today held an important hearing on the Stop Online Piracy Act but only those witnesses who would not object to the law being invited. This was designed to give the impression that all the witnesses were in favour of the law."
Bump this baby. Also voted for frontpage!
I do what i want, because I can.
DirkGently said:
Bear in mind that the UK equivalent to this, the 'Digital Economy Act' was passed into law some time ago with barely a whimper of protest. Just like ProtectIP, it was kept quiet and barely reported on until it was too late. We just woke up one morning to draconian new laws. Again, it was bought and paid for by big media.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Economy_Act_2010
I doubt anything can be done to stop the same happening in the US, but perhaps enough pressure can be brought to bear to force some changes to the act. At least you guys have advanced warning to do something about it.
Edit: Big Content stacks Senate Committee
"US Senators have done their level best to give Big Content the law it wants to basically lock up citizens who might think of piracy or file sharing without having to worry about that pesky thing called constitution. The House Judiciary Committee today held an important hearing on the Stop Online Piracy Act but only those witnesses who would not object to the law being invited. This was designed to give the impression that all the witnesses were in favour of the law."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for posting this...It's absolutely crazy...I'm sure they'll find a way to completely circumvent a public hearing that gives opponents a chance to speak throughout the entire process.
jamRwoo said:
Thanks for posting this...It's absolutely crazy...I'm sure they'll find a way to completely circumvent a public hearing that gives opponents a chance to speak throughout the entire process.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As always, the people can have a say.. at the ballot box!
I'm pleased to report that the government that introduced the DEA in the UK, lost in the next election shortly afterwards. (After being in power for thirteen years).
Karma b*tches!
Bumping this due to some developments...
Well, this is finally seeing the light of day and getting coverage by some news agencies; caught these articles on Drudge Report.
I just want to say that I hope Chris Dodd dies in a fire. Slowly. FYI: He's a former Senator spearheading this bill AND the new head of the MPAA. Primarily by attempting to bribe members of Congress. Gotta love that the Hollywood/Record Label lobbyists are getting all the airtime, while the people who actually understand this stuff are being silenced as much as possible.
Not too late to call/write your representatives. You can also share these links with your friends...tweet them, facebook them, reddit them, do whatever. If these links don't scare the living s**t out of you, well...idk...too many benzos perhaps. Feel free to copy this post and use it wherever, if you wish.
All of these articles are great and cover a different aspect (with some overlap) of the consequences of this legislation. Props to The Hill for giving this so much coverage; glad someone's doing it.
---
MPAA Head Chris Dodd on Online Censorship Bill: China's the Model -- http://bit.ly/u7kgXy
"When the Chinese told Google that they had to block sites or they couldn't do [business] in their country, they managed to figure out how to block sites."
Google chairman says online piracy bill would 'criminalize' the Internet -- http://bit.ly/tRWEnj
"It's not a good thing. I understand the goal of what SOPA and PIPA are trying to do," Schmidt said of the Senate counterpart bill, the Protect IP Act. "Their goal is reasonable, their mechanism is terrible. They should not criminalize the intermediaries. They should go after the people that are violating the law."
Internet piracy bill: A free speech 'kill switch' -- http://bit.ly/tY6o6f
Consider this: Under the proposed legislation all that’s required for government to shutdown a specific website is the mere accusation that the site unlawfully featured copyrighted content. Such an accusation need not be proven – or even accompanied by probable cause. All that an accuser (or competitor) needs to do in order to obtain injunctive relief is point the finger at a website.
Legal expert says online piracy bill is unconstitutional -- http://bit.ly/tNBUDH
"Conceivably, an entire website containing tens of thousands of pages could be targeted if only a single page were accused of infringement," Tribe writes. "Such an approach would create severe practical problems for sites with substantial user-generated content, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, and for blogs that allow users to post videos, photos, and other materials."
---
God, do I hate politicians.
P.S. For those interested in a more detailed analysis of how this is a flagrant violation of free speech: Laurence Tribe, a Harvard law professor and Supreme Court advocate, wrote a memo detailing how SOPA does exactly that -- http://scr.bi/sFSRBg
Closed:
XDA Forum Rules said:
2.4 Personal attacks, racial, political and/or religious discussions: XDA is a discussion forum about certain mobile phones. Mobile phones are not racial, political, religious or personally offensive, therefore none of these types of discussions are permitted on XDA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This thing that Apple is suing every freaking mobile companies/manufactures with their (stolen) patents is really a shame. Look at this very last new of ITC banning the importation and selling of certain HTC phone in US. Whoever buys any new Apple products enable the company to become stronger and stronger, unfortunately not in a good way. Apple is trying so hard and at any cost to get rid of the mobile concurrence. This means hijacking the mobile marketing, which will eventually realize the company's dream to capitalize and control the entire mobile markering worldwide. If we are all a little bit clever, we should really open a campaign and let everyone know what the company plans really are, what they are doing, and work something together to stop this shame.
Please share this, have ur say and let everyone know what is going on, what they are really buying today and what consequence their purchase might cause.
Thanks
Thing is, we who do NOT endorse them through product purchase, already know better. Those who do, won't care about this just like they don't care to blow heaps of money out their a**es. So....
Skv012a said:
Thing is, we who do NOT endorse them through product purchase, already know better. Those who do, won't care about this just like they don't care to blow heaps of money out their a**es. So....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea thats true.. Although I am sure there's still someone who doesn't know it and would like to stay away from powering up a company that plans to capitalize and get in control of everything.
A clear message needs to be sent...
i really don't know what apple is trying to do, sueing all the world.. maybe next will be eve cause she bit an apple???
by the way, reading everything is good to know HTC, and maybe Google already have a solution for this patent infrigments, so the android user experience will always be better than iphonish one...
I see no reason for either panic or concern. First of all, look at the range of devices affected: v1.6 - v2.2 You can't even purchase new HTC device with Froyo or older OS. Second, HTC already responded that they do have a workaround in the pipeline that would diminish all claims Apple's suit made.
Take a step back and try to look at the bigger picture. Ask yourself, why is Apple suing Samsung, HTC, etc? My theory is very simple; Apple's runaway success ran out of steam and they losing ground to Android quicker then Apple engineers are able to put together a new product. Earlier today Andy Rubin bragged about 700,000 daily activations. Simply put, Apple is scared of competition. Nay, they are scared ****less. Since they can't compete by innovating they choose to fight by litigating.
If there is one thing I have agreed with Jobs on, was his musing that "market will sort everything out". It looks like market already did just that and the new is not good for Apple, hence the lawsuits.
Segnale007 said:
This thing that Apple is suing every freaking mobile companies/manufactures with their (stolen) patents is really a shame. Look at this very last new of ITC banning the importation and selling of certain HTC phone in US. Whoever buys any new Apple products enable the company to become stronger and stronger, unfortunately not in a good way. Apple is trying so hard and at any cost to get rid of the mobile concurrence. This means hijacking the mobile marketing, which will eventually realize the company's dream to capitalize and control the entire mobile markering worldwide. If we are all a little bit clever, we should really open a campaign and let everyone know what the company plans really are, what they are doing, and work something together to stop this shame.
Please share this, have ur say and let everyone know what is going on, what they are really buying today and what consequence their purchase might cause.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe the other tech companies should stop copying Apple. They are the ones to be shamed, not Apple. If they hadn't copied Apple's products, Apple would not be suing. Blaming and hating Apple is like a criminal blaming and hating their victim for fighting back.
MartyLK said:
I believe the other tech companies should stop copying Apple. They are the ones to be shamed, not Apple. If they hadn't copied Apple's products, Apple would not be suing. Blaming and hating Apple is like a criminal blaming and hating their victim for fighting back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ugh, you have it completely backwards. I remember watching Job's last keynote and chuckling every time he presented a "new", "revolutionary", and of course "magical" feature in IOS 5. Notifications complete with pulldown status bar! Cloud services! OTA updates!!!!
Yeah, you're right, everyone is stealing from Apple and therefore deserves the consequences.
AnyMal said:
Ugh, you have it completely backwards. I remember watching Job's last keynote and chuckling every time he presented a "new", "revolutionary", and of course "magical" feature in IOS 5. Notifications complete with pulldown status bar! Cloud services! OTA updates!!!!
Yeah, you're right, everyone is stealing from Apple and therefore deserves the consequences.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is it backwards? Is the NB patented? Are any of the iOS 5 features patented by anyone other than Apple?
MartyLK said:
I believe the other tech companies should stop copying Apple. They are the ones to be shamed, not Apple. If they hadn't copied Apple's products, Apple would not be suing. Blaming and hating Apple is like a criminal blaming and hating their victim for fighting back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Obviously you don't know what ur talking about (take it as a polite way to call you troll).
What Apple has been doing ever since it joined the IT market back in 1985 is to steal other ideas and projects in a legal manner, then patent them and use them against any company/manufactures.
Btw Apple calls this "REINVENTING". Just like they reinvented the phone, reinvented the way to interact between apps, DLNA, the cloud, the pull down notification bar, and the list goes on on and on..
I think I said pretty much all..
Apple business model will fail not now but in the future. What apple is trying to do is to stall it in a way. They already knew sole proprietary will fail, they almost went under at the start..
Steve jobs started a vendetta againts the android os. This is common knowledge. He got mad that someone in his company said NO left and made a product just as good.
My thing is how and why would apple try to sue something that isnt even their os. Thats like microsoft suing apple for a double click to open a file. Or adobe suing java, its childish.
Or ford suing all car manufacturers for having a break pedal.
Noting was stolen, apple has its own OS and android has theirs.
In my opinion suing for how a devices behaves. Its stupid dumb and im surprised the judges havent said that.
sent from my RuBiX infused MT4G Slide using xda premium
Segnale007 said:
Obviously you don't know what ur talking about (take it as a polite way to call you troll).
What Apple has been doing ever since it joined the IT market back in 1985 is to steal other ideas and projects in a legal manner, then patent them and use them against any company/manufactures.
Btw Apple calls this "REINVENTING". Just like they reinvented the phone, reinvented the way to interact between apps, DLNA, the cloud, the pull down notification bar, and the list goes on on and on..
I think I said pretty much all..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And you are wrong. (call it a polite way of calling you a liar). Apple never steals. They never stole from IBM or Xerox. If a tech is owned by another company, Apple will license it if the need it...or buy it.
This just in: Apple owns another patent. They don't steal, they own.
http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Wins...+Blatantly+Ignores+Prior+Art/article23570.htm
MartyLK said:
And you are wrong. (call it a polite way of calling you a liar). Apple never steals. They never stole from IBM or Xerox. If a tech is owned by another company, Apple will license it if the need it...or buy it.
This just in: Apple owns another patent. They don't steal, they own.
http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Wins...+Blatantly+Ignores+Prior+Art/article23570.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So did they "license" the android style notification dropdown in IOS5? And did they license the slide to unlock feature that they got a patent for?
MartyLK said:
And you are wrong. (call it a polite way of calling you a liar). Apple never steals. They never stole from IBM or Xerox. If a tech is owned by another company, Apple will license it if the need it...or buy it.
This just in: Apple owns another patent. They don't steal, they own.
http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Wins...+Blatantly+Ignores+Prior+Art/article23570.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You obviously came here just to troll so I am not going to bother to deconstruct your ignorant comment. If you cared enough you'd read the very article you posted here just to get a general idea how the company you're shilling for "competes" in this market.
AnyMal said:
You obviously came here just to troll so I am not going to bother to deconstruct your ignorant comment. If you cared enough you'd read the very article you posted here just to get a general idea how the company you're shilling for "competes" in this market.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You, obviously, came here to work up hate and anger for Apple. And I do see and read. I see Apple as the victim here. The others are violating Apple and you are "shilling" for the guilty.
Patents are the most rediculus things I have ever seen...
Patents should be used for something totally unique in innovation like design and stuff and not for something that is like a building block of every other phone too...
And buying someone else's patents is bull****...it shows that the company is not innovative and steal others ideas and just keeps on bragging that they have done all the innovations....
Talking about stealing...apple has also stolen other's stuff like the drop down notification bar, siri etc etc...but google and other companies never patent everything they innovate because they know that somethings are crusial for every phone and its very anti innovative to patent those things...
I wonder what will happen when the Patent Office starts accepting patents for things other than technology...then the whole world will start suing each other...and another world war will begin...
And look what Steve Jobs said in his biography that he can even go for a bio nuclear war to stop android....which shows how greedy he is that he can destroy the whole world just for something **** like iPhone...
And people want to move towards open source bacause its very innovative and free too...
Sent from my HTC Desire S using XDA App
Funny how he completely ignores my post.
varun.singh286 said:
Patents are the most rediculus things I have ever seen...
Patents should be used for something totally unique in innovation like design and stuff and not for something that is like a building block of every other phone too...
And buying someone else's patents is bull****...it shows that the company is not innovative and steal others ideas and just keeps on bragging that they have done all the innovations....
Talking about stealing...apple has also stolen other's stuff like the drop down notification bar, siri etc etc...but google and other companies never patent everything they innovate because they know that somethings are crusial for every phone and its very anti innovative to patent those things...
I wonder what will happen when the Patent Office starts accepting patents for things other than technology...then the whole world will start suing each other...and another world war will begin...
And look what Steve Jobs said in his biography that he can even go for a bio nuclear war to stop android....which shows how greedy he is that he can destroy the whole world just for something **** like iPhone...
And people want to move towards open source bacause its very innovative and free too...
Sent from my HTC Desire S using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Typical. People who hate Apple focus on one tiny little thing they do and ignore the mountain of violations the other companies have been doing against Apple for years.
And Apple owns Siri. They bought the technology from the creator of an Apple app and improved it and made it more perfect. That's what Apple does.
MartyLK said:
You, obviously, came here to work up hate and anger for Apple. And I do see and read. I see Apple as the victim here. The others are violating Apple and you are "shilling" for the guilty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whoa.... chill down man.... your hatred is showing right now no? Your post just implied that everyone copied crapple.
Oh, did you mean that your beloved company copied Android's notification bar? Oh well....
BTW stop defending Apple and go back and pray at Steve Jobs altar.
Oh, the new Apple= Assholes placing patent lawsuits everywhere.
Sent from my mini but mighty E10i using XDA app
sooyong94 said:
Whoa.... chill down man.... your hatred is showing right now no? Your post just implied that everyone copied crapple.
Oh, did you mean that your beloved company copied Android's notification bar? Oh well....
BTW stop defending Apple and go back and pray at Steve Jobs altar.
Oh, the new Apple= Assholes placing patent lawsuits everywhere.
Sent from my mini but mighty E10i using XDA app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry to enrage you and make you be a false witness. All that I said, I said with calmness and rationality. What you read into it, you read from your own emotions. So, my apologies for controlling your emotions and making you do something against your will.
MartyLK said:
This just in: Apple owns another patent. They don't steal, they own.
http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Wins...+Blatantly+Ignores+Prior+Art/article23570.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOOOOOOOL. I didn't even need to click on that, it's in the link itself: "ignores prior art". So yeah, Apple owns. They own things they didn't actually invent! Awesome! Not!
MartyLK said:
How is it backwards? Is the NB patented? Are any of the iOS 5 features patented by anyone other than Apple?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the typical Apple fan mode of operation:
Apple Fan: "Apple invented all this stuff!!"
Someone: "Err, no they didn't. There was this, that and the other stuff, which Apple copied."
Apple Fan: "Yeah, well, Apple owns the patents!!"
Suddenly it's not important anymore that Apple hasn't invented anything. And they're completely oblivious how what this does is point to the brokenness of the patent system, as opposed to pointing to the supposed brilliance of Apple.
MartyLK said:
And Apple owns Siri. They bought the technology from the creator of an Apple app and improved it and made it more perfect. That's what Apple does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But, but, but... I thought Apple is this brilliant inventor! Now you're telling me that the biggest "revolution" of IOS5 wasn't invented by Apple? How's that work?
As you might be knowing today Samsung lost to the Apple..
Reason :>> Dumb Patent System for granting common sense patent...!!!!
To protect the patent system and free innovation Defendinnovation Organization has put up movement to change the patent system.
Please sign it..
The patent system is in crisis, and it endangers the future of software development in the United States. Let's create a system that defends innovation, instead of hindering it.
Here are the basic changes we need in patent system..
1.A patent covering software should be shorter: no more than five years from the application date.
2.If the patent is invalid or there's no infringement, the trolls should have to pay the legal fees.
3.Patent applicants should be required to provide an example of running software code for each claim in the patent.
4.Infringers should avoid liability if they independently arrive at the patented invention.
5.Patents and licenses should be public right away. Patent owners should be required to keep their public records up-to-date.
6.The law should limit damages so that a patent owner can't collect millions if the patent represented only a tiny fraction of a defendant's product.
7.Congress should commission a study and hold hearings to examine whether software patents actually benefit our economy at all.
I am willing to sign
How would these changes affect a solo operator or a small business? From my limited understanding of patents in general, their purpose is to protect everyone's intellectual property, not just big business.
Nonverbose said:
How would these changes affect a solo operator or a small business? From my limited understanding of patents in general, their purpose is to protect everyone's intellectual property, not just big business.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really don't have any answer to your question friend since I am not expert
but I totally agree with your point..
I just understand ,what has happened with samsung is not good..
and the cause is current patent system
Signing is just one step..
There will be whole lot of debate on this kind of question
feel free to ask question at defendinnovation.org
In the end we should have Better Patent System that will protect everyone's intellectual property, not just big business as you said..
I feel if someone is willing to make change for good ,take part in it ,
Hope you understand my point..