Blackmoor Vituperative

Microsoft is back with more vague threats and bogus claims concerning their patents being violated by open source software.

In an interview with Fortune, Brad Smith, Microsoft’s general counsel, claims that the Linux kernel violates 42 of its patents, the Linux graphical user interfaces run afoul of another 65, the Open Office suite of programs infringes 45 more, e-mail programs violate 15, while other assorted free and open-source programs allegedly transgress 68.

(from eWeek, Microsoft Claims Open-Source Technology Violates 235 of Its Patents)

You first heard this noise back in 2004. It was piffle then, and it’s piffle now. The fact that a company would continue to make empty threats like this, year after year, should be enough reason for you to stop doing business with them.

That’s aside from the practical ramifications of using Microsoft’s software. Anyone who runs a mission-critical server on a Windows machine rather than a Linux or Unix machine, anyone who runs a web server on IIS rather than Apache, anyone who chooses to use Microsoft Office instead of OpenOffice, anyone who chooses to use Internet Explorer rather than Firefox — these people are all technological illiterates who shouldn’t be allowed near a computer keyboard or an IT architecture meeting.

Amazon.com Inc. (Nasdaq:AMZN –news) said on Wednesday the company will launch a digital music store later in 2007 with millions of songs, free of copy protection technology that limits where consumers can play their music.

(from Yahoo! News, Amazon to sell digital music free of copy curbs)

Way to go, Amazon. Great move.

Here we go again. Congress has decided it needs to protect us from spyware, but – surprise, surprise – the bill they are most seriously considering actually offers no help in that regard. What’s worse, the bill seems designed to make it harder for you to legally go after those who spy on you, particularly if they are doing so to determine if you’re authorized to use a software product.

Last week a subcommittee of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce approved H.R. 964, the Spy Act, which bans some of the more blatant forms of spyware such as those that hijack computer or log keystrokes. The bill now goes to the full committee for approval, and it’s expected to move quickly as it has strong bipartisan support.

But why? There are already plenty of federal and state laws regarding computer fraud, trespass, and deceptive trade practices that make spyware illegal. The existing laws have been sufficient to allow the FTC and/or state attorneys general to even successfully go after some of the nastier adware companies like Direct Revenue and Zango/180 Solutions. So what is the purpose of this law?

[…]

In other words, it’s perfectly OK for basically any vendor you do business with, or maybe thinks you do business with them for that matter, to use any of the deceptive practices the bill prohibits to load spyware on your computer. The company doesn’t have to give you notice and it can collect whatever information it thinks necessary to make sure there’s no funny business going on. And by the way, another exception provision specifically protects computer manufacturers from any liability for spyware they load on your computer before they send it to you. Of course, the exception for software companies checking to make sure you’re an authorized user is the strongest evidence of what this bill is all about. After all, in terms of function, there’s not much difference between spyware and DRM. Too bad for Sony this bill wasn’t already the law when its rootkit-infected CDs came to light.

[…]

Let’s sum up. If the Spy Act become law, hardware, software, and network vendors will be granted carte blanche to use spyware themselves to police their customers’ use of their products and services. Incredibly broad exceptions will probably allow even the worst of the adware outfits to operate with legal cover. State attempts to deal with the spyware problem will be pre-empted and enforcement left up almost entirely to the FTC. Gee, what’s not to like in that deal?

(from InfoWorld, Spy Act Only Protects Vendors and Their DRM)

So here’s my question: just how stupid are Federal legislators? As corrupt as they are, I simply can’t imagine that people in Congress are intentionally making it legal for criminal organizations like Zango and Sony to infect consumers — not just their customers — with malware, rootkits, and so on. But that is exactly what they are doing. So… what the hell is wrong with these people?!?

Want further proof that the Spy Act will do more to protect spyware and adware than it will to stop it? As the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Fred von Lohmann pointed out in his Deep Links blog, Zango, which is regularly identified by security company Webroot Software as one of the biggest spreaders of adware, came out in recent testimony before Congress in full support of the Spy Act in its current form.

That’s pretty much all I need to know. If a company such as Zango thinks this bill is A-OK, then we might as well start referring to it as the Please Spy Act.

(eWeek, Another Bad Technology Bill)

Further information:

The Spy Act
The EFF’s Fred Lohmann on the Spy Act’s impact

A Russian headmaster said on May 7 a court has fined him half his monthly wage for using pirated copies of Microsoft software at his school in a case President Vladimir Putin has called “utter nonsense.”

Prosecutors said Alexander Ponosov had violated Microsoft’s property rights by allowing pupils to use 12 computers with unlicensed copies of Microsoft Windows and Office software.

Ponosov, a headmaster in a remote school in the Perm region of the Ural mountains, said he did not know the computers had fake licenses when they were delivered by a sub-contractor.

Russia has been urged to crack down on the widespread availability of cheap pirated software, films and music as it prepares to enter the World Trade Organization.

[…]

“Today the court brought in a guilty verdict — they ordered me to pay a fine of 5,000 roubles ($194.4),” Ponosov told Reuters by telephone from the Perm region.

“I consider myself not guilty and I will file an appeal,” he said, adding that he had not paid the fine. He said he earned about 10,000 roubles a month.

Putin has described the case as “utter nonsense” and former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev even asked Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates to intercede on the teacher’s behalf.

(eWeek, Russian Teacher Fined in Microsoft Piracy Case)

Take heed, true believers: this is exactly what the Digital Rights Mafia (DRM) is all about. You are not a consumer: you are a criminal, and the media robbers barons will twist the legal system into pretzels to make sure you get what they think you deserve.

We are all Alexander Ponosov, and it will get much worse before it gets better. Half your monthly salary is nothing compared to what the Digital Rights Mafia wants from you.

Michael Geist has it right, when speaking of the US bullying of other countries to get them to adopt US-style copyright legislation:

Not only are the policies suspect, but the USTR report should be seen for what it is — a biased analysis of foreign law supported by a well-orchestrated lobby effort.

(from BBC News, Ignore the US copyright bullies)

Here’s a funny Mac ad spoof from Ctrl+Alt+Del.

In a new effort dubbed “Luke’s Binoculars” — after the high-tech binoculars Luke Skywalker uses in Star Wars — the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is setting out to create its own version of this science-fiction hardware. And while the Pentagon’s R&D arm often focuses on technologies 20 years out, this new effort is dramatically different — Darpa says it expects to have prototypes in the hands of soldiers in three years.

The agency claims no scientific breakthrough is needed on the project — formally called the Cognitive Technology Threat Warning System. Instead, Darpa hopes to integrate technologies that have been simmering in laboratories for years, ranging from flat-field, wide-angle optics, to the use of advanced electroencephalograms, or EEGs, to rapidly recognize brainwave signatures.

[…]

Darpa’s ambitions are grounded in solid research, says Dennis McBride, president of the Potomac Institute and an expert in the field. “This is all about target recognition and pattern recognition,” says McBride, who previously worked for the Navy as an experimental psychologist and has consulted for Darpa. “It turns out that humans in particular have evolved over these many millions of years with a prominent prefrontal cortex.”

That prefrontal cortex, he explains, allows the brain to pick up patterns quickly, but it also exercises a powerful impulse control, inhibiting false alarms. EEG would essentially allow the binoculars to bypass this inhibitory reaction and signal the wearer to a potential threat. In other words, like Spiderman’s “spider sense,” a soldier could be alerted to danger that his or her brain had sensed, but not yet had time to process.

(from Wired, Pentagon to Merge Next-Gen Binoculars With Soldiers’ Brains)

With dozens of lawsuits against phone companies for cooperating with the Bush Adminisration’s domestic spying operations, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s suit against AT&T, President Bush is now asking Congress to give immunity to the phone companies, The Washington Post reports.

Lots of luck getting that one through a pretty pissed off Democratic Congress.

The proposal states that “no action shall lie . . . in any court, and no penalty . . . shall be imposed . . . against any person” for giving the government information, including customer records, in connection with alleged intelligence activity the attorney general certifies “is, was, would be or would have been” intended to protect the United States from terrorist attack. The measure, which has not yet been filed, is contained in a proposed amendment to the fiscal 2008 intelligence authorization bill.

This little bit of stonewalling comes as the FBI was found to have contracted with phone companies to obtain phone records. Without probable cause to search someone’s records, however, that’s a violation of the Fourth Amendment. So the bureau claimed the requests qualified under the “exigent circumstances” exception to the Fourth. The Supreme Court has interpreted this to mean a danger the suspect will escape or destroy evidence. The Justice Dept. inspector general found that no such circumstances existed; the FBI just plain lied.

“To let them off the hook now sets a dangerous precedent by encouraging them to continue to engage in illegal collaborations with the government in the future,” said Kevin Bankston, staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which last year filed a class-action lawsuit against AT&T for allowing the government to unlawfully monitor U.S. residents.

“The end result is not only will the Bush administration continue to stonewall Congress in its request for information on warrantless wiretapping, but no one who participated will have any threat above their head. You could just face a congressional subpoena and say, ‘I’m sorry, I’m immunized,’ ” the ACLU’s TimSparapani said.

Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said he wouldn’t support immunity for companies that intentionally broke the law.

(from ZDNet, Bush wants immunity for telcos that assisted in illegal searches)

It’s hard to keep one’s faith in the good intentions of our President when faced with something like this.

The Norway Liberal Party (Venstre) which is holding 6% of the seats in parliament has issued a resolution stating that “Copyright law is outdated”.

“A society where culture and knowledge is free and accessible by everyone on equal terms is a common good. Large distributors and copyright owners systematically and widely misuse copyright, and thereby stall artistic development and innovation.”

Here are some changes proposed by the party “to reinstate the balance in copyright law”:

– Free file sharing for personal use “Laws and regulations, both national and international, need to be changed so they only regulate limitations of use and distribution in a commercial for-profit context.”
– Shorter commercial copyright term (the current span in Norway is 70 years).
– Ban on DRM – “…anyone who has bought the right to use a product needs a technologically neutral way of using it. This means that distributors can not control how citizens wish to play back legally bought digital music.”

“It is wrong to make an entire generation of criminals,” said vice chairwoman of the Liberal Party, Trine Skei Grande. “We managed to make compensation models when the photocopier was invented, but we haven’t managed to do anything about modern technology. The law must adapt to the citizens and the impact of technological innovation.”

(from The Register, Norwegian liberals call for relaxation of copyright laws)

Way to go, Norway. Well, 6% of Norway, anyway.

Recent weeks have brought major changes in the music industry as it relates to online digital music distribution. In March over six thousand people signed our open letter to Steve Jobs about DRM. Now Apple and EMI have now committed to distributing without Digital Restrictions Management (DRM), and there have been similar announcements from other online music stores and retailers. Last week brought news that Universal Music may be opening up some of their catalog to DRM free sales too.

One of the most outspoken opponents to ending DRM has been Edgar Bronfman, Jr., the CEO and Chairman of Warner Music Group. On Monday we launched a multi pronged campaign to ?Wake Up Warner? with DefectiveByDesign members calling Warner Music executives and an open letter to Edgar Bronfman, Jr. Take a moment to sign the letter and spread the word (http://www.defectivebydesign.org/actions/open_letter/warner_music). We will be closing the letter on Friday and sending it with your signature to send a wake up call to Bronfman from music fans and customers: DRM is dead and Warner should change its position.

Sign the letter today!
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/actions/open_letter/warner_music

In other news, the encryption for HD DVD DRM has been cracked and the key has been widely circulated in the last few days proving once again the futility of DRM schemes. DefectiveByDesign is planning actions in cities around the world and will be launching an open letter to the MPAA and studio executives urging them to abandon their support for for DRM later this month. Look for more on these actions next week!
In solidarity,

Gregory, Peter, Henri and the DRM Elimination Crew

(from DefectiveByDesign)

Apparently Digg.com has been dealing with the fallout of the HD DVD crack:

Congratulations to the Digg users who revolted against the censorship of a number today. Digg took down stories that featured the DRM encryption key for HD DVD encryption. Digg users then started reposting it until the entire front page of Digg was covered with the story and each one had thousands of Diggs.

After tens of thousands of diggs on multiple stories, Digg has decided to stop fighting it.

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has been abusing its power with legal takedown notices to websites publishing this number. They are fighting a losing battle trying to hold on to the power they purchased for their clients pushing bad legislation like that included in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) that has made it illegal to circumvent a DRM scheme.

What happened today is an example of how preposterous DRM is. Every major DRM has been cracked, and once it is, it is useless, and the money invested in it is wasted. Companies are hell bent on locking up their paying customers with DRM, but today’s action shows it wont work. A new day has dawned.

(from DefectiveByDesign)

I don’t know that I’d paint the picture as rosy as that. Just because a few thousand consumers rebel against the Digital Rights Mafia doesn’t mean “a new day has dawned”. Hell, RIAA has sued at least that many of their paying customers (and have bullied tens of thousands more), and Sony knowingly and cheerfully infected hundreds of thousands of their customers’ computers with a rootkit. The Digital Rights Mafia clearly place a higher priority on control than they do on profit, much less customer good will. It’ll probably be another twenty years before they give up on their war against their customers, minimum.

Still, it’s nice to see people stand up and do the right thing. Speaking truth to power, and all that.

Oh, and by the way… Blu-Ray has been cracked, too (although not BD+… yet).

When it comes to technology patents and the effect they have on innovation and the ability to use and create technology, the news is usually on the bad side (for example some company crushing a competitor using a patent, or a troll attacking real innovators with a questionable patent).

But finally the news is good, possibly even very good. Today the U.S. Supreme Court made a ruling (PDF) that will make it much harder to get iffy patents and even harder to attack real innovators with these iffy patents.

In this case, which had some of largest technology companies in the world arguing on both sides, the Supreme Court has removed a very weak test for whether an invention is obvious, making it much harder to get a patent on an obvious technique, such as one that merely combines several other inventions in an obvious way.

This is huge news. Many of the worst and most egregious patents out there simply take a known idea and add an obvious twist to it. With this new decision, the court has made it much harder to get a patent in this way. Even better, it looks as if it will be possible to now use this ruling to go after other existing bad patents that were based on obvious ideas. This one court ruling could possibly lead to the removal of many of the worst patents out there today and finally make some real innovation possible.

So, thank you, U.S. Supreme Court. We don’t always see eye to eye, but today it looks like you got it right. Here’s one of my favorite quotes from the decision:

“We build and create by bringing to the tangible and palpable reality around us new works based on instinct, simple logic, ordinary inferences, extraordinary ideas, and sometimes even genius. These advances, once part of our shared knowledge, define a new threshold from which innovation starts once more. And as progress beginning from higher levels of achievement is expected in the normal course, the results of ordinary innovation are not the subject of exclusive rights under the patent laws. Were it otherwise patents might stifle, rather than promote, the progress of useful arts.”

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

(from eWeek, Big Win in the War Against Patents)

Yay! Hooray! Yippee!