The Great Geek Manual News

“Digital preservation” sounds simple enough; just slap that data onto increasingly cheap and spacious hard drives, keep some offsite backups, and you’re good to go, right? Not so fast, says the Library of Congress, and it points a crabbed and bony finger directly at US copyright law—and at DRM.

Libraries labor under most of the same rules that govern the rest of us, with a few key exceptions. For instance, libraries can make three copies of unpublished works in their collections, and copyright holders have to provide the Library of Congress with two deposit copies of all books.

But copyright law also hampers important work being done at places like the Library of Congress, and a major new report on the issue from the Library points out the problems with the current rules. One big issue is the exemption for published works in a library’s collection; these can also be copied three times, but only to “replace a work in their collections that is damaged, deteriorating, lost or stolen or whose format has become obsolete.” In other words, librarians can’t backup or archive such works until destruction is well under way.

In addition, “obsolete” doesn’t mean what you or I might mean by the term; the Library notes that LPs still can’t be copied into digital archives because record players remain available on the open market and are therefore not “obsolete.”

Read the Entire Story…
Source: Ars Technica

Direct-to-consumer genetic-testing companies who were served cease-and-desist letters by the state of California responded this week. Some insisted that they are in compliance with state laws, and others closed their doors to Californians. Both 23andMe and Navigenics, two high-profile, California-based startups offering a new breed of genome-wide screening services, say that they will continue to operate in the state.

The letters demanded that companies offering genome screening services directly to consumers comply with state regulations for medical testing, which means that the tests must be performed in certified laboratories and be ordered by a physician. A spokeswoman for the Department of Public Health, which issued the letters, said that the action was in response to customer complaints. On Tuesday, the department released the names of the 13 companies that had been served letters. That list includes well-known companies like Navigenics, 23andMe, and Decode, based in Reykjavik, Iceland. All three companies scan the entire genome for specific genetic variations linked to disease and then tabulate the results to offer customers a calculation of their genetic risk for various diseases. Also included on the list are lesser-known companies that offer an assortment of testing, such as screening for a gene linked to hair loss and nutritional advice based on one’s genome.

At issue is whether these tests constitute clinical information. Unlike genetic tests for simple genetic diseases, such as Huntington’s, in which a specific genetic mutation guarantees that the bearer will develop the disease, the genome tests use the recent flood of genetic information to try to predict the likelihood that someone will develop a certain disease. Theoretically, this would allow him or her to take steps to prevent the disease; someone at risk of heart disease might take statins, for example.

Read the Entire Story…
Source: Technology Review

Congress’s biggest telecom disability rights advocate has introduced new legislation that would, among other provisions, extend close captioning to some Internet video. Edward Markey’s (D-MA) “21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2008″ (H.R. 6320) covers about a dozen areas. The proposed law requires hearing-aid compatibility of all broadband telephone products and mandates a certain level of ease in accessing captions on TV with remote control devices.

But perhaps the most interesting and debated section of the bill will be its Internet video captioning requirements. The law says that 18 months after its enactment, the Federal Communications Commission must set up regulations that include “an appropriate schedule of deadlines for the provision of closed captioning of video programming distributed to the public over the Internet.”

Three kinds of video would be affected by the law: preproduced material that has already been captioned for TV viewing, live programming, and video that is “generally considered to be comparable to programming provided by multichannel programming distributors.” The legislation also includes a waiver provision. The FCC could grant waivers to companies that petition “showing that the requirements contained in this section would result in an undue burden.”

Read the Entire Story…
Source: Ars Technica

Despite public protests both online and on the streets of Stockholm, the Swedish parliament has voted in favor of a new “wiretapping” law which invades the privacy of its citizens by allowing the government to monitor web traffic and phone calls, without the need for court orders or similar authorization.

On Wednesday evening the Swedish parliament voted yes to a bill that allows FRA, National Defense Radio Agency, to monitor all phone traffic and e-mail traffic in the name of national security. Unlike the police, FRA can listen in on anyone for any purpose without a court order, bringing the level of personal integrity in Sweden to an all-time-low.

The bill was passed after it was debated in parliament, with 143 votes in favor, 138 opposed and 1 representative abstaining. Before the debate the situation was crystal clear. The four party government alliance would win the vote if all party members voted in favor of the bill, but with the seven seat majority the government currently holds, only four representatives had to vote against the party line in order for the bill to fail.

With all the editorials and statements regarding integrity, copyright and online-rights published during the last months by members of these parties, surely there would be four members of the parties that would follow their convictions rather than the party line? In fact, there were four representatives who have been crystal clear in these kinds of issues: Birgitta Ohlsson (Liberal Party), Karl Sigfrid (Moderate Party), Annie Johansson and Fredrick Federley (both Centre Party). They have profiled themselves on these issues and in some cases even campaigned on them. Surely, Fredrick Federley couldn’t let down his everyone of his voters? Things proved more complex.

Read the Entire Story…
Source: Torrent Freak

The government is ready to introduce controversial new copyright legislation that experts believe will introduce harsh new restrictions on downloading, copying songs to CDs and music players, unlocking cellphones and time-shifting of television shows. Minister of Industry Jim Prentice and the Minister of Canadian Heritage Josee Verner will unveil the bill to amend the Copyright Act on Thursday at 10:45 a.m. ET with brief statements, followed by a question-and-answer session with the media.

Critics fear the bill will mirror the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which similarly brought in restrictive measures and opened the door for copyright owners to enact huge lawsuits against violators.

Prentice has said on several occasions that Canada’s Copyright Act must be amended in order to bring the country into compliance with the World Intellectual Property Organization treaty it signed in 1996.

The minister was forced to retreat on introducing the bill in December after being hit with major public opposition. More than 20,000 people joined a protest group started on social networking site Facebook by University of Ottawa internet and e-commerce professor Michael Geist, an outspoken critic of the bill.

The opposition to the legislation has only grown since then, with the Facebook group counting more than 40,000 members now.

Canadian artists, librarians and students, as well as a business coalition made up of some of Canada’s biggest companies — including Rogers Communications Inc. and Telus Corp., as well as Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc. — have expressed their opposition to any legislation that imposes harsh copyright restrictions.

Read the Entire Story…
Source: CBC News

Islamist group Hamas has told the main Palestinian telecoms company to block access to pornographic Internet sites in the Gaza Strip, a Hamas government official said on Monday.

Gaza’s Ministry of Communications said in a statement that telecommunications firm PALTEL has agreed to block Internet users in the Hamas-controlled coastal enclave from viewing adult websites starting this month.

“The aim of the move is to protect the Palestinian community from cultural pollution and to protect the young generations from the misuse of the Internet through viewing pornographic sites,” Hamas government spokesman Taher al-Nono said.

An Internet provider in the Gaza Strip, which Hamas seized in June after routing President Mahmoud Abbas’s secular Fatah forces, estimated that about 400,000 Gazans surf the Web and said almost half of them were aged 18-35.

Attacks against video stores and Internet cafes have increased over the past two years. Some of the attacks had been claimed by radical Muslim groups who say such places run contrary to Islamic values.

Other Muslim countries such as Iran, Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia also control access to some political, social and pornographic websites.

Source: Reuter

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) stepped in front of a group of tech executives in Washington this morning to deliver a caffeinated and surprisingly sharp defense of network neutrality. Pledging to use “every ounce of my energy to protect network neutrality,” Wyden had a message for ISPs who might be pondering new charges for various forms of access: “think twice.” If ISPs start down that road, they might soon find that they lose key legal protections including “safe harbors” and tax freedom.

Wyden delivered his ultimatum at a Computer & Communications Industry Association conference in DC, where he cast the entire network neutrality debate in terms of a legislative compromise. Years ago, Congress began protecting ISPs from the twin threats of regulation and taxation; in return, ISPs were expected to deliver an unimpeded connection to the Internet. A move away from a neutral ‘Net would undermine the “very philosophical underpinnings of what we fought for for the last 15 years,” according to Wyden. If that happens, he sees no reason for Congress to continue sheltering ISPs.

The two specific pieces of legislation encompassed by this threat are the Communications Decency Act and the Internet Tax Freedom Act. While much of the CDA was tossed out by a federal judge on the grounds that it unconstitutionally limited free speech, section 230 of the act survived. 230 provided a safe harbor to ISPs and web sites, exempting them from liability for content posted to or through them, a provision that benefits Ars and every other website that allows user-generated content and comments. The law saved ISPs “vast sums,” according to Wyden.

Read the Entire Story…
Source: Ars Technica

Cubans are getting wired. The island’s communist government put desktop computers on sale to the public for the first time Friday, ending a ban on PC sales as another despised restriction on daily life fell away under new President Raul Castro.

A tower-style QTECH PC and monitor costs nearly US$780 (euro505). While few Cubans can afford that, dozens still gawked outside a tiny Havana electronics store, crowding every inch of its large glass windows and leaving finger and nose prints behind.

Inside, four clerks tore open boxes, hastily assembling display computers. By the time a sign went up listing the PCs specifications, more than a dozen shoppers were lined up to get in.

“Look at that!” murmured Armando Batista as he pressed against the window. Although he can’t afford to buy one, he said, “these are good for a start.”

The gray and black QTECHs, complete with DVD players, bulky CRT monitors and standard-issue black mice and keyboards, are the only model available.

The Cuban PCs have Intel Celeron processors with 80 gigabytes of memory and 512 RAM and are equipped with Microsoft’s Windows XP operating system. Both could be violations of a U.S. trade embargo, but not something Washington can do anything about in the absence of diplomatic relations with Havana.

Read the Entire Story…
Source: Wired News

The camel that is the UK Government’s answer to what it terms “extreme porn” lumbers onward. Although, by the time it escaped the Lords last week it really was beginning to look like a particularly moth-eaten dromedary. What started in the Commons as a relatively straightforward piece of legislation from the government has now twice survived opposition amendments – only to be mauled by its own side.

The proposal, contained in the Criminal Justice Bill, is to make it a criminal offence to possess certain images that are deemed to be extreme porn. In the course of its passage through the Lords, Baroness Miller, Home Affairs spokesperson for the Lib Dems, tried on two occasions to amend it.

In the first instance, two weeks ago, she attempted to remove this provision altogether, as being too unclear. In the second and latest instance last Wednesday, she attempted to give an objective test to the definition of extreme porn by linking it to the Obscene Publications Act 1959.

This was strongly resisted by the Minister, Lord Hunt, who suggested that such linkage might have the effect of widening the scope of the offense. The amendment was lost by 134 votes to 91.

Read the Entire Story…
Source: The Register

When a Mexican press aide scooped up the BlackBerrys of several US officials this week and attempted to take them out of the country, Secret Service agents intercepted him before he could get on his plane and demanded the devices be returned. BlackBerrys and other portable electronics now carry so much information that they can be a gold mine to those who have a chance to look through them. But it’s not just Mexican diplomatic officials who would like a peek inside such devices; the US Border Patrol has been exercising its right to search the contents of any laptop or electronic device entering or leaving the country, and that has some civil liberties groups alarmed.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation sent a letter today on behalf of 40 civil liberties organizations to the head of the House Committee on Homeland Security. The groups want Congress to hold hearings on border searches of laptops and other electronics, searches which the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed could proceed without any form of probable cause. The next time you enter the US, Customs and Border Patrol agents legally have the right to take your laptop and rifle through it, and they don’t need to give you a reason why.

The letter argues that these sorts of searches can easily become “abusive” without oversight, and the Department of Homeland Security has refused to release any information about its policies and procedures relating to such searches. Worries about such searches aren’t merely hypothetical; laptop searches are happening now (hence the court case) and have been for years. In fact, the Ninth Circuit considered a similar case back in 2006 and came to the same conclusion.

“In a free society, the government cannot have unlimited power to read, sees, store and use all information on any electronic device carried by any traveler entering or leaving the nation,” says the letter. “Therefore, Congress must exercise oversight to ensure that border searches are not overly invasive or discriminatory, and establish appropriate safeguards to protect any information collected and maintained by the government.”

Read the Entire Story…
Source: Ars Technica

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin said Tuesday there’s no need for new regulation of the Internet, saying his agency has all the authority it needs to prevent discrimination by Internet service providers.

“I do not believe any additional regulations are needed at this time,” Martin said at a hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee, noting recent enforcement actions by the commission. The FCC has conducted two hearings on “network management” following admissions by Comcast Corp. that it sometimes delayed file-sharing traffic for subscribers as a way to keep Web traffic flowing.

The hearing was called at a time when the issue of “network neutrality”—the principle that people should be able to go where they choose on the Internet without interference from network owners—has heated up. The network neutrality debate has divided Congress, with Democrats largely in favor and Republicans mostly opposed, a point that became clearer at Tuesday’s committee meeting.

“It is a political division now and it’s getting more so,” said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska. “It is unfortunate.” He said a return to “intense regulation” of the Internet is “entirely unwarranted.”

The hearing included some star power, with the appearance of Justine Bateman, best known for her role on the TV sitcom Family Ties. Bateman is now a founding partner of a new online media venture.

Read the Entire Story…
Source: Breitbart

The FBI on Wednesday called for new legislation that would allow federal police to monitor the Internet for “illegal activity.” The proposal from FBI Director Robert Mueller, which came during a House of Representatives Judiciary Committee hearing, appears to go beyond a current plan to monitor traffic on federal-government networks. Mueller seemed to suggest that the bureau should have a broad “omnibus” authority to conduct monitoring and surveillance of private-sector networks as well.

The surveillance should include all Internet traffic, Mueller said, “whether it be .mil, .gov, .com–whatever you’re talking about.”

In response to questions from Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, Mueller said his proposed legislation “balances on one hand the privacy rights of people receiving information with…the necessity of having some omnibus search capability, utilizing filters that would identify illegal activity as it goes through, and allow us the ability to catch it at a choke point.” Issa suggested he would support such legislation.

If Mueller’s omnibus-monitoring proposal became law, it could implicate the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee of freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. In general, courts have ruled that police need search warrants to obtain the content of communication, and the federal Wiretap Act created “super warrant” wiretap orders that require additional steps and judicial oversight.

In addition, it’s unclear whether “illegal activity” would be limited to responding to denial-of-service attacks and botnets, or would also include detecting other illegal activities, such as online gambling, the distribution of “obscene” images of adults engaged in sexual acts, or selling drugs without a license.

Read the Entire Story…
Source: CNet

The Wireless Internet Nationwide for Families Act, proposed by Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA), would instruct the FCC to auction off the 2155-2175MHz band of spectrum. The winner would have to use the spectrum to create a nationwide wireless Internet service that is available to the public at no cost, automatically blocks access to pornographic content, and is fully open to third-party device manufacturers.

The proposal was a response to the recent spectrum auction, which saw AT&T and Verizon, the two biggest mobile carriers, walk away with big chunks of the newly-opened airwaves. The aim of the new proposal is to encourage another player to enter the market so that consumers can have a viable third choice to cable and DSL.

“The cost of broadband service is a barrier for too many families who want broadband, with more than 100 million Americans without broadband at home,” Eshoo said in a statement. “The results of the 700MHz auction disappointed many of us who hoped that a new entrant would emer