Perhaps forcing the RIAA to actually follow established law and civil procedure (which all of us learn in first year law school), they will find that their crusade is a lot more difficult and expensive than they originally thought....

In another win for due process, Judges Sam Sparks and Lee Yeakel ruled that recording industry lawsuits in the Western District of Texas would have to proceed individually -- rather than 150+ "Does" at a time. See PDF Order. As the judges noted, the RIAA members' practice violates the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Rule 20(a), joinder, requires that parties be linked in the "same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences." Moreover,

The filing fees for the recent four cases totaled $600, whereas the filing fees for 254 separate cases would have been $38,100. That is a considerable loss of revenue to the public coffers.

Similar orders have now been filed in Pennsylvania (2x), Florida, and in a movie industry suit in California, plus several DirecTV cases around the country. Note to lawyers and law students -- that CivPro is pretty important.

Posted by mikki at 03:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Plans for pop-up ads and restrictions on copying have some consumer advocates wondering about Tivo's commitment to customer control. The company says it has to bow some to Hollywood and advertiser interests. [Wired News]

Posted by mikki at 03:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

So while the turkey is roasting, and while the winds are gusting above 30 knots today, I turned on CNN, where I saw the amazingly long lines at the airports of people waiting for flights. And I had to think once again of something that the Wessiepooh mentioned. These people in lines in the airports have NOT been screened in any way. Anyone could walk into Dulles or National Airport, O'Hare, Atlanta, or any other major airport with multiple hundreds of people trapped in lines with nowhere to go, and, with a relatively small bomb, take out countless people, bringing the airline and travel industry to a crashing halt AGAIN.

You don't think the terrorists have already thought of this? Well of course they have. I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't planning it already. So rather than worry about grandpa's remains, why aren't they doing something about THIS possible threat? MULTIPLE airplanes worth of people in one go. I would personally find that scenario a LOT more scary than most of the "horrible threat scenarios" that the TSA is coming up with now.

Posted by mikki at 12:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

On this day of thanksgiving, I am giving thanks to the gods for being granted the intelligence to see just how absurd the world truly is. On this national day of dead turkey disposal, the wheels of stupidity still turn, as was evidenced by this phone call to Verizon repair service that I just hung up from.
-Me: I wanted to let you know that a tree is down, and leaning precariously against the telephone lines for our entire area, including my T1
-Verizon: I'm sorry, but our technicians don't touch trees
-Me: So you're telling me that you're going to wait until my T1 goes down and becomes an emergency repair on Thanksgiving Day with specialized technicians that make a ton of holiday pay, and THEN you fix it?
-Verizon: Yes
-Me: And you want to wait until the entire area is out, and they're calling you on cell phones, screaming that they can't call their grandmothers, or even the Butterball hotline because they can't cook their turkeys, and THEN you'll come out?
-Verizon: Yes
-Me: Well that's pretty damn LAME, don't you think?
-Verizon: Yes
-Me: Well, all righty then. Have a nice holiday
-Verizon: You too, thank you for calling Verizon

Posted by mikki at 12:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The latest terrorist threat? Bereaved families trying to get their loved one's remains home are likely just putting up a front to smuggle bad things in the URN. Yes, that's right...TSA is now going to require special containers for your loved one's remains so that they can X ray them properly. So, your mother, father, sister, or brother will have to be transported in a plastic baggie or perhaps a nice tupperware container until you get to your destination where a nice, friendly TSA partner funeral home will transfer the remains to something less tacky.

Always looking out for our personal safety, the TSA has offered to "partner" with funeral homes in order to provide this important service. So don't forget when your loved one dies suddenly and/or tragically, causing you to become so grief stricken you can hardly deal with your own life, don't forget to ask your funeral home if they are a TSA partner before you try to get the urn with the remains back home. Else you may not be allowed to take them on the plane with you.

Don't believe me? Check out their notice . So glad to see our government is out there taking care of us.

Posted by mikki at 12:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Absolutely fantastic news: the aspects of the copyright mashup bill that had so many of us worried were dropped before it passed in the Senate this weekend. The omnibus is now a minibus -- S 3021 [PDF].

Kudos to Public Knowledge, the Home Recording Rights Coalition, the Consumer Electronics Association, NetCoalition, and many others for their hard work in this fight.

Says Gigi Sohn in the PK press release:

Consumers won a major victory when the Senate passed legislation removing the most egregious elements of the omnibus copyright bill that had previously been under consideration. We strongly support the version of the Family Movie Act included in the bill, which gives families more control over how they watch movies and television, preserving the right to skip over commercials. The bill will benefit consumers, both in their entertainment choices now, and from the innovation in technology that will result in coming years.

We are also pleased that HR 4077 was dropped from the bill that passed. That legislation would have lowered the standard for copyright infringement. The Senate also wisely removed the PIRATE Act, which would have made the government the entertainment industry’s private law firm at taxpayer expense.

The Senate should also be commended for including in the bill legislation helping to preserve orphan works and reauthorizing the National Film Preservation Board. These features of the bill are important steps in preserving our nation’s culture. We look forward to working with Congress in coming sessions to make further progress in advancing consumer interests and preserving copyright balance.

Later: Derek Slater: "Take note again of how much better the public interest is being represented today than just a few years ago. Still playing a lot of defense, but at least it's relatively successful defense."

Posted by mikki at 04:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

From Dan Gilmor

Wired News: Senate May Ram Copyright Bill. Several lobbying camps from different industries and ideologies are joining forces to fight an overhaul of copyright law, which they say would radically shift in favor of Hollywood and the record companies and which Congress might try to push through during a lame-duck session that begins this week. The Senate might vote on HR2391, the Intellectual Property Protection Act, a comprehensive bill that opponents charge could make many users of peer-to-peer networks, digital-music players and other products criminally liable for copyright infringement. The bill would also undo centuries of "fair use" -- the principle that gives Americans the right to use small samples of the works of others without having to ask permission or pay.

This bill isn't just tweaking at the edges. It's a radical move, designed to control how we use digital media, mainly to prevent us from doing things with it that the copyright owners don't specifically authorize.

I'm tempted to laugh at the prohibition of skipping past commercials. To make this work, of course, we'll need to chain people to their chairs and sofas, prohibiting anyone from heading to the bathroom or refrigerator while the commercial is running.

Public Knowledge has more information on this atrocious bill, and a page that helps you fax your opposition to your members of Congress. I suggest you call them -- 202 224 3121 -- instead.

The cartel keeps pushing, pushing, pushing. Don't let them get away with it. [Dan Gillmor's eJournal]

Posted by mikki at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The good people at Public Knowledge have one-stop shopping for learning about and taking steps to oppose the copyright mashup bill that may once again be on the verge of passing.

Michael Grebb @ Wired:

Several lobbying camps from different industries and ideologies are joining forces to fight an overhaul of copyright law, which they say would radically shift in favor of Hollywood and the record companies and which Congress might try to push through during a lame-duck session that begins this week.

The Senate might vote on HR2391, the Intellectual Property Protection Act, a comprehensive bill that opponents charge could make many users of peer-to-peer networks, digital-music players and other products criminally liable for copyright infringement. The bill would also undo centuries of "fair use" -- the principle that gives Americans the right to use small samples of the works of others without having to ask permission or pay.

Posted by mikki at 07:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This absolutely gorgeous little girl is our latest little beautiful Chinese Crested Hairless girl named Talia. She is blue eyed which means she can't be shown, but is not supposed to pass the blue eyes to her puppies. We are hoping that she and Calvin love each other enough to have puppies sometime next year. Isn't she adorable?

Posted by mikki at 10:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

So, you thought that DRM schemes were just to make sure you paid for your copy of the latest CDs? Things are a lot more insidious that that, unfortunately. Not only do they want you to pay for the use of the content, but they also want to tell you precisely how you can use it in your own home once you've paid for it. And with the new High Definition television offerings coming down the pike, things are have become so much worse that the Betamax case, allowing us to time shift and archive programs in our own homes... [Dark Rantings]

Posted by mikki at 10:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Yet another encroachment of Hollywood into our homes in an attempt to dictate what we do with materials we PURCHASE from them. It's bad enough that they block our ability to forward through commercials on DVDs, but now they want to make it ILLEGAL to fast forward through them with your Tivo or ReplayTV. Absolutely pathetic. It's about time consumers stood up and said "enough is enough."

As early as this week, the Senate may try to quickly pass a bill that would radically change copyright law in favor of Hollywood and the music industry. One provision: Skipping commercials would be illegal. Michael Grebb reports from Washington. [Wired News]

Posted by mikki at 09:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This is really cool! To those of us who are Ancient Egypt buffs, finding out what actually happened to King Tut would be quite the thing

By testing the DNA of the mummy of Tutankhamun, Egypt will attempt to learn what killed the teenaged pharoah who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago. Talk about a cold case. [Wired News]

Posted by mikki at 09:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

ICANN has initiated arbitration (before the ICC's International Court of Arbitration) against VeriSign under the .net Registry Agreement, seeking declaratory judgments that many things VeriSign has done or attempted to do over the years (Sitefinder, ConsoliDate, IDN, WLS, and stemming the abusive actions of shell registrars when they destructively query the registry for secondary market purposes) violate that agreement. [CircleID]

Posted by mikki at 09:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Privacy? What is privacy?

The government says all U.S. airlines must turn over passenger data so that it can test a planned screening system. The airline industry and others complain that the order will mean massive privacy violations, extra expenses and possible trouble with foreign countries. By Ryan Singel. [Wired News]

Posted by mikki at 07:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This is really pretty scary. Take a look...

Funding for Charities Should Not Be Tied to Screening

Washington, DC - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today joined the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and a number of other nonprofit organizations in filing for an injunction from the US District Court in Washington, DC, to stop the federal government from requiring the charities to use blacklists in order to receive payroll donations from federal employees. The groups argue that the new requirement, which was implemented without any notice or public comment period, is not authorized by statute and violates the First and Fifth Amendments.

The Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) enables federal employees to contribute easily to their favorite nonprofit organizations through automatic payroll deductions. In 2003 alone, this program brought over $248 million to thousands of charities. Earlier this year, the government for the first time began requiring all organizations participating in the CFC to certify that they have screened every employee and expenditure against a series of blacklists created by the government on the basis of secret information. Charities that refuse to sign the certification cannot participate in the CFC, even if they meet all other requirements.

"The government can't force charities to become its 'anti-terrorism enforcers' simply because federal employees donate to those charities," said Kevin Bankston, EFF Attorney and Equal Justice Works/Bruce J. Ennis Fellow. "EFF refuses to violate the privacy of its clients and employees by screening them against secretly compiled blacklists. It was wrong during the McCarthy era, and it's wrong now."

EFF participated in the CFC program for two years prior to the blacklist certification requirement but withdrew from the program earlier this year in protest.
Contacts:

Kevin Bankston
Attorney, Equal Justice Works / Bruce J. Ennis Fellow
Electronic Frontier Foundation
bankston@eff.org

Posted by mikki at 09:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

More from Dan Gillmor

NY Times: Ashcroft Quits Top Justice Post; Evans Going, Too. In a handwritten resignation letter to Mr. Bush, dated Nov. 2, that was released by the White House on Tuesday, Mr. Ashcroft said, "The demands of justice are both rewarding and depleting... I take great personal satisfaction in the record which has been developed. The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved. The rule of law has been strengthened and upheld in the courts. Yet, I believe that the Department of Justice would be well served by new leadership and fresh inspiration."

If it wasn't such a serious matter, you'd be tempted to laugh at Ashcroft's assertion that "securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror" has occurred. Of course this is false. Crime hasn't stopped during the Bush administration, and only a fool believes we're not going to see more terrorism in years to come. Ashcroft is not a fool, whatever else he is.

Saying the rule of law "has been strengthened and upheld in the courts" is brazen. It's actually true in a way Ashcroft plainly didn't mean: The courts have ruled in key cases that the Bush administration can't decide on its own what the law is. Remember, for example, that this government has asserted the president's right to declare an American citizen to be an "enemy combatant," and then lock the citizen away indefinitely without access even to a lawyer. The notion of the president as beat cop, prosecutor, judge and jury was too much for this Supreme Court, which did uphold the rule of law as it ruled against the administration's dictatorial stance.

No president in recent memory has given the back of his hand to the rule of law like this one. Bush has made it clear he wants to expand government's power to spy on citizens and otherwise restrict their liberties (except the right to own weapons, of course). He's also made it clear that he intends to appoint judges at all levels who will take his expansive view of government authority.

For four years, Ashcroft has been the president's oh-so-willing servant. It's good that he's leaving. But don't think for a minute that the anti-liberty policies he pursued are going to change. [Dan Gillmor's eJournal]

Posted by mikki at 11:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sometimes it takes a non-lawyer to show us just how far overboard the law has gone. In this case, it's trademark law and Cory's wonderful description of how TM lost its way.

Spurred by James Surowiecki's Wired piece on the decline of brand power, Cory looks back at how far we've come from the days when "consumer confusion" was the law's paramount concern.

Says Cory: This is a timely piece because the rhetoric of branding has been used to make unprecedented incursions against privacy, competition and speech.

It used to be that trademarks were intended to protect "consumers" (that's us) from being tricked into buying goods under false pretenses. If it said "Coca-Cola" on the can, there had better be Coke inside, and not Pepsi or Crazy-Bob's-Discount-House-of-Soda brand. When a competitor of Coke's shipped a bottle of stuff that was misleadingly packaged or labelled, Coke's authority to sue its competition derived from its need to protect us, not its bottom line. It didn't get to sue because it owned Coca-Cola, but because it was acting as a proxy for its customers, who were being decieved by con-artists who mislabelled their goods.

...

But as time went by, trademarks stopped being about us and started being the embodiment of brands (which, as Surowiecki points out, are on the wane and were probably never as important as we thought to begin with).

This meant that trademarks weren't just things that helped the public know what they were buying -- they are a kind of pseudo-property. Pseudo-property that could be defended on the basis that it "belongs" to a company, who need to be protected from having the value of their marks "diluted" or "tarnished."

Read it all, it's Chilling.

Posted by mikki at 11:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)