Technology, the Internet, legal issues, sports, and anything else I find interesting.

Just minutes ago the verdict in the case of The Pirate Bay Four was announced. All four defendants were accused of ‘assisting in making copyright content available’. Peter Sunde: Guilty. Fredrik Neij: Guilty. Gottfrid Svartholm: Guilty. Carl Lundström: Guilty. The four receive 1 year in jail each and fines totaling $3,620,000.

Very interesting they decided not to hear any technical explanations and judged this solely on intent. We’ll probably see much more of that as the web becomes more and more tangled. Under that premise, the notion that “all ISPs are guilty of the same thing” is hardly logical. ISPs are not knowingly and willingly facilitating illegal file sharing like these guys clearly were. The only part that astounds me is how long it’s been able to go on (oh, I’m also astounded at how many kids are acting behooved at the ruling).  I also disagree with the idea that you kill one and two more pop up in its place. You kill a big violator such as this, and you’ve killed one. If other fools feel like stepping up and rolling the dice, well maybe they will have to pay the piper like these guys do.

Read More

Ars sits down with “Billion Dollar Charlie” Nesson, the Harvard Law professor who’s taking on the RIAA in federal court. Winning his case would be great, but Nesson’s thinking even bigger. He wants nothing less than a national, Internet-enabled conversation about copyright and damages in the digital age.

Charlie Nesson will likely break ground with this case, providing new insight into internet copyright law and how it applies to different usage cases. By using the internet to broadcast each meeting, conference, and deposition, he may just get the publicity he needs to open a real discussion. His argument is backed by logic, but it appears there is a web of technologies and technicalities (no pun intended) to work through before finding justice for the plaintiff. No matter what the outcome, I believe this will be a landmark case in the complexities of modern copyright law.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/billion-dollar-charlie-vs-the-riaa.ars

Attention iPhone users, Apple will be unveiling their new OS3.0 tomorrow, so be sure to check it out!

http://apple.com/iPhone

All you designers might not agree with her, but she speaks the truth!
Read the rest of this entry »

Lots of useful information in here. I learned things about why 301s are the best way to redirect users from non-www to www or vice versa, how to create a video sitemap, and that Google has a whole bunch of webmaster tools to help analyze every aspect of your web site and it’s search engine visibility.

Read the rest of this entry »

It’s reassuring to hear some progress is being made in way of monitoring and cracking down on those who abuse their outsourcing laws and rights to provide truly equal opportunity employment.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/02/feds-finally-cracking-down-on-h-1b-abuses.ars

Let’s say that an H-1B-free labor market has set a price on a year’s worth of work from a programmer with a bachelors degree and two years experience at US$35,000 + $12,000 (benefits like health insurance for a family of four) = $47,000. Now let’s say that companies acquire the ability, via the introduction of the H-1B program, to import foreign labor of comparable quality. The average imported worker is willing provide the same work for $35,000, but instead of benefits she wants health insurance for herself only ($3,000/year) plus a green card. Thus the promise of a green card to the H-1B worker is valued by the market at $9,000/year, and you can and must factor this in to account for the H-1B employee’s total compensation.

The cost of the green card to the employer is much less than the cost of the American worker’s insurance coverage, plus the foreign worker is obligated to work for the employer for a set period if she wants to get the promised green card. This is a win-win for the employer and the H-1B worker, but not for the American employee, to whom the green card is worth exactly US$0. The American has been priced out of the market because the H-1B will sell her labor at what amounts to a steep discount in exchange for a green card.

Saw this on flickr and thought it was hilarious. Then I thought it was depressing. Now I don’t know what the heck to think. It’s dark humor, right?

Here in New Zealand a new copyright act went into effect on 1st November. The most controversial clause has been delayed until 28th February. This clause says that an ISP must have a policy of disconnecting anyone repeatedly accused of copyright infringment.

I agree that this act would place the responsibility of judge in the hands of the ISP. But without some governing body working with the ISPs instead of against them, it seems the RIAA is setting the ISPs up for some muddy waters.

Within the wishlists of RIAA is making ISPs liable for copyright infringement that happens through their networks.. This we need to be very vocal about. How’s an ISP to know what that packet you pull is a copyright infringement?? by only allowing you to talk to sony.com + apple.com ?

This I can also agree with, to an extent. Without the pressure to localize and enforce copyright infringement on the Internet, then those committing the crimes won’t have any reason not to do it. The right thing to do notwithstanding, the world is faced with a new twist on an old problem. I believe the legislation will eventually balance itself out, and freedom/justice will find it’s way to Internet.

Read More »

Have you seen those lawn signs around your city that say something like “Single? SanDiegoSingles.com” or something similar? I certainly have seen them everywhere. I have been very interested in how this company’s model works and how successful it has been thus far. Apparently they are pulling in a “solid six figure” revenue. I am no expert in guerrilla marketing or the matchmaking business, but I imagine it can get interesting and quite lucrative. After all, they aren’t really selling anything but opportunity. I’m more interested into the legal implications of a business model that relies massive scale print marketing (involving signs that are often placed illegally). Apparently not much has been done by way of stopping them, although I wonder if a company sponsoring gross illegal sign placement is guilty of more than hundreds of thousands of “petty crimes”? Well, Robert Moore didn’t touch on that aspect of it but he did break it down every other way possible, with great graphics to boot! Definitely a great read about one man’s insightful modern investigation. Update: Tim Williams has posted more information about the prosecution of this company.

The three internet giants Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google are joining together by agreeing to a common set of principles concerning conducting business with nations that restrict free speech and expression. They are basically trying to protect people’s information overseas with oppressive governments. I was interested to learn that the Human Rights First and Committee to Protect Journalists and nonprofits the Center for Democracy and Technology and Business for Social Responsibility took part in the formation of this humbly crafted entity known as the Global Network Initiative. What I found troubling was the lack of specific implications and obligations pertaining to these companies. Some other points of interest are the restrictions on citizenship and how that plays into this decision making. I would also like to hear the CCIPS chime in.

At least one human rights organization that didn’t sign onto the plan said it doesn’t go far enough. “More serious questions have to be asked about these company’s legal obligations,” said Morton Sklar, executive director of the World Organization for Human Rights USA. For instance, he said he would have liked the document to address whether Internet companies are violating U.S. or international laws by complying with requests from certain governments.

Read More »