0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
AT&T, Verizon and other telcos have been warning that they're going to demand money from Google and other sites if those sites want adequate bandwidth. But now a senator is proposing to ban the practice, and is standing up to the telcos, who are acting more like a cybermafia than legitimate businesses.Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon today introduced legslation that would ban network operators from charging sites for extra bandwidth. The law would also ban the practice of favoring some content providers over others.Other Congressman are kowtowing to the telcos because the telcos are big campaign contributors. They'd let the telcos do what they want, and turn the Internet into their own private network.The Wyden bill, called the Internet Non-Discrimination Act of 2006, faces tough sledding. Money talks, and the telcos are doing a lot of talking.In addition, the FCC has made it clear it won't take any action on the matter
Just like its competitors, Tower Records is having a hard time selling music at its stores. Unlike its competitors, Tower has a novel response: It's going to give its music away on the Internet.All of the artists available on the service are signed to smaller labels and have joined a group called the Independent Online Distribution Alliance. Acts in the IODA include hip-hop group Blackalicious and rock flashback Peter Frampton.Tower appears to be the first company that promises to cut in both artists and consumers on any revenue the service generates. "It's an excellent way to champion the breaking of new music as well as promote established artists that are not considered relevant to the highly formatted genres of mainstream radio," said Morty Wiggins, head of 33rd Street Records, a music label owned by Tower.
Only three months after it closed the merger of AT&T and SBC Communications, the new AT&T is opening its checkbook again to buy BellSouth for a whopping $67 billion. So what's this megamerger mean for consumers? Unlike Verizon Communications, which is spending billions of dollars to extend fiber optics directly to consumers' homes, AT&T and BellSouth have extended their fiber networks only into neighborhoods. Then they use existing copper lines to offer broadband service using new ADSL technology, which allows them to increase download and upload speeds into the home. But a merged AT&T/BellSouth may also stifle competition and actually slow down innovation, according to consumer groups such as the Consumers Union and Consumer Federation of America. These groups said they would ask the Justice Department's antitrust division to reject the merger. Critics of the merger fear that a bigger and stronger AT&T would have too much influence in the overall market.
It may have been a while since we've heard anything new from Congress about the Broadcast Flag's radio counterpart, the Audio Flag, but rest assured, your elected representatives haven't stopped thinking about it. And the latest incarnation of the law, the Audio Broadcast Flag Licensing Act of 2006, H.R. 4861, is a bill you might want to actually give a perusal. Turns out that, when it comes to digital radio, the bill basically takes away any "fair use" rights you might have assumed you had, and lets the record industry decide what you can and can't do with your radio.# Want to record a radio show so you can listen to it later? Sorry, not unless the record industry says you can. Want to tape a couple of songs, so you can listen to them again before deciding whether to buy them? Forget about it.In fact, the law as written would require manufacturers to get FCC approval if they wanted to include recording functions in their digital radios. Of course, this is still just a bill, yes, it's only a bill, which means there's time to make some changes. And, as we've seen, there are at least some Senators who have doubts about giving the record industry even more control over what we can and can't listen to
The Entertainment Software Association (ESA), which represents game producers, wants US gamers to register to vote and to lobby against new restrictions. Democrat Senators Hillary Clinton and Joseph Lieberman are backing the Family Entertainment Protection Act, which would restrict the sale of some games. Violent and sexually explicit games are currently self-regulated and age-rated. The ESA has set up a website that aims to get gamers involved in politics.The website, the Video Game Voters Network, highlights a range of research and academic opinion downplaying suggestions that violence within games is linked to real-life crime. It also includes a list intended to dispel commonly-held myths about US gamers, often stereotyped as stay-at-home teenagers and social recluses. The site says that the average game player is 30 years old and has been a gamer for more than nine years. Mrs Clinton said: "It is up to adults whether they wish to expose themselves to this type of violence and pornography. But we have 40 years of research to tell us that violent media is bad for our children." Under the terms of the proposed legislation retailers would be legally barred from selling restricted material to minors.
The courts have a proven track record of fashioning balanced remedies for the copyright challenges created by new technologies. But when Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in 1998, it cut the courts out of this role and instead banned any devices that "circumvent" digital rights management (DRM) technologies, which control access to copyrighted content. The result has been a legal regime that reduces options and competition in how consumers enjoy media and entertainment. Today, the copyright industry is exerting increasing control over playback devices, cable media offerings, and even Internet streaming. Some firms have used the DMCA to thwart competition by preventing research and reverse engineering. Others have brought the weight of criminal sanctions to bear against critics, competitors, and researchers. The DMCA is anti-competitive. It gives copyright holders—and the technology companies that distribute their content—the legal power to create closed technology platforms and exclude competitors from interoperating with them. Worst of all, DRM technologies are clumsy and ineffective; they inconvenience legitimate users but do little to stop pirates. Fortunately, repeal of the DMCA would not lead to intellectual property anarchy. Prior to the DMCA's enactment, the courts had already been developing a body of law that strikes a sensible balance between innovation and the protection of intellectual property. That body of law protected competition, consumer choice, and the important principle of fair use without sacrificing the rights of copyright holders. And because it focused on the actions of people rather than on the design of technologies, it gave the courts the flexibility they needed to adapt to rapid technological change
The degree of preventing piracy has been the focus of considerable debate. On one side of course is the MPAA who wishes to protect its content from becoming pirate fodder. The position has merit; however consumer advocates and the electronics industry have their own interests to protect as well. In the continuing effort to strike a balance that will satisfy both sides, The Committee on Energy and Commerce will hear testimony today from both sides.Testifying today will be high profile consumer electronics manufacturer TiVO, along with new comer Sling Media. Sling Media manufactures an interesting device called a Sling Player that retransmits a consumer’s incoming television content to any Internet-enabled PDA, smart phone, laptop, desktop or any internet-ready device.Providing additional and perhaps alternative testimony will be the MPAA and Entertainment Software Association (ESA.) The ESA is a trade organization that protects the intellectual property right of over 90% of all entertainment software manufactures.
The FBI has drafted sweeping legislation that would require Internet service providers to create wiretapping hubs for police surveillance and force makers of networking gear to build in backdoors for eavesdropping, CNET News.com has learned. FBI Agent Barry Smith distributed the proposal at a private meeting last Friday with industry representatives and indicated it would be introduced by Sen. Mike DeWine, an Ohio Republican, according to two sources familiar with the meeting. The draft bill would place the FBI's Net-surveillance push on solid legal footing. At the moment, it's ensnared in a legal challenge from universities and some technology companies that claim the Federal Communications Commission's broadband surveillance directives exceed what Congress has authorized. The FBI claims that expanding the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act is necessary to thwart criminals and terrorists who have turned to technologies like voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP.
Industry lobbyists are pressing Congress to adopt at least five different proposals that would give them more control over their works as they flow through new digital pipelines into living rooms and portable devices. But these measures, like the technologies they would affect, have a hard time distinguishing between illicit actions and legitimate ones.The bills would pressure device makers and service providers to limit or eliminate features from some products, such as the ability to record individual songs off satellite radio. In essence, tech companies would have to alter what they are selling to safeguard the entertainment industry's wares.But what the entertainment industry is seeking in this year's proposals isn't merely protection from piracy, it's after increased leverage to protect its business models.
Students sharing music and movies on campus networks may soon face stiffer penalties as the result of a U.S. Senate resolution calling on universities to do more to eliminate illicit file sharing across campus networks.The resolution, sponsored by Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., and passed on May 22, demands that colleges and universities "adopt policies and educational programs on their campuses to help deter and eliminate illicit copyright infringement occurring on, and encourage educational uses of, their computer systems and networks."As universities take steps to restrict the use of their bandwidth to access the Internet, campus file sharing has shifted more and more to local area networks, known as LANs.Steve Tally, media relations manager for Information Technology at Purdue (ITaP), said that file sharing across local area networks has increased due to new software."Although the vast majority of file sharing occurs with peer-to-peer applications across Internet-based connections, new utilities allow widespread file sharing within local computer networks, such as Purdue's ResNet and Air Link systems," Tally said. "File sharing across these networks is a copyright violation if you make copyrighted songs and movies available to others for downloading."The Senate resolution comes in the wake of increased political pressure against campus file sharing from the entertainment industries. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) recently sent letters to the presidents of 40 U.S. universities in 24 states — including Indiana — regarding file sharing activities on university local area networks.According to the letters, these two groups suspect that college students are using their universities' internal networks to share copyrighted files with each other, thereby avoiding the Internet and staying hidden from entertainment industry investigators
Law enforcement officials have indicated to the companies they must retain customer records, possibly for two years. The companies have discussed strengthening their retention periods - which currently run the gamut from a few days to about a year - to help avoid legislation.Testifying to a Senate panel, Gonzales acknowledged the concerns of some company executives who say legislation might be overly intrusive and encroach on customers' privacy rights. But he said the growing threat of child pornography over the Internet was too great.The FBI also said during the meetings that such records would help their terrorism investigations, said one person who attended the meetings but spoke on condition of anonymity because the meetings were intended to be private.
Congressional attempt to update the nation's 1996 Telecommunications Act died with the pounding of the gavel that recently ended the 109th Congress. Ted Stevens (R-AK), the aging senator whose grasp on the technology in question was definitely "old school," won't be chairing any committees when the next Congress is sworn in, and the bill he helped to draft must be introduced again next year to have any chance at passing—and that's unlikely to happen unless Stevens is a fan of Pyrrhic victories.Assuming that the new Congress turns its attention once more to the Telecommunications Act, the resulting product should look quite a bit different. The Stevens-drafted version included no support for network neutrality, but plenty of love for audio and video broadcast flags.That angered groups like the SavetheInternet.com coalition, which counts such unlikely allies as the National Religious Broadcasters and the ACLU among its members. The group calls the death of the bill "a stunning victory for real people who want to retain control of the Internet," and notes that network neutrality is now in the hands of "what appears to be a more Web-friendly Congress."
