Archive for July, 2005

Security Restrictions for Foreign Researchers on Sensitive Contracts

Posted in Education, Politics on July 18th, 2005

“The Defense Department has proposed new restrictions on access by foreign researchers to sensitive technology useful to national security. The proposed rules would require foreign researchers to wear badges and would require laboratories to contain segregated work areas to control the scientists’ access to the technology. ” excerpt from Monday, July 18, 2005 Chronicle of Higher Education (subscription requried).

A gentle introduction to Darknets

Posted in Technology & Society on July 16th, 2005

You’ve heard about the “dark web” or the “invisible web” (article
book
web directory
web search)
that vast expanse of the
Web that is “completely invisible to general purpose search engines”
like Google and Yahoo. So what are “Darknets”?

According to
wikipedia
a Darknet “is a private file sharing network where users only connect to
people they trust. Typically such networks are small, often with fewer
than 10 users each.” According to
J.D. Lasica
darknets are
“the vast, gathering, lawless economy of shared music, movies,
television shows, games, software, and porn–a one-touch jukebox that
would rival the products and services of the entertainment companies.”

Why is this important to libraries? Because darknets represent the struggle between
locked-down content that cannot be acquired or preserved or shared
and content that can be added to library collections and that readers can
share and use and re-use. Darknets exist now, but they give us a glimpse
into one possible future for digital content where battles over
“intellectual property” and laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright
Act change the way readers interact with information and change what
libraries can legally do.

The concept of Darknets started with a 2002 paper
(The Darknet and
the Future of Content Distribution
) by four Microsoft researchers
who examined file sharing and how it impacts business. They
argued that “the darknet genie will not be put back into the bottle”
and
examined “the relevance of content protection and content distribution architectures”
implying that too much digital rights management (DRM) would be bad for business.

The original paper has been a popular touchstone in the arguments about
DRM. (One of my favorites is Cory Doctorow’s Microsoft
Research DRM talk
in June of 2004.)

Now a new book (Darknet: Hollywood’s
War Against the Digital Generation
) by J.D. Lasica, co-founder of Ourmedia.org, provides a
useful addition to this dialog. Lasica takes a middle way approach
believing that both extremes (everything should be free vs. everything
should be fee) are wrong. From the publisher’s blurb:

Darknet tells the stories of the fascinating personalities and colorful
characters on both sides of this culture clash, and details the growing
clampdown on our digital freedoms. Darknet goes behind the scenes to
pull back the curtain on Big Entertainment insiders, technology
innovators, and digital provocateurs lurking in the darkest corners of
cyberspace. We meet the double-agent who stands at the highly
specialized hub of movie pirating while consulting to Hollywood studios
on piracy; the teenage boys who spent seven years refilming Raiders of
the Lost Ark; the Columbia TriStar executive who helped develop the
movie industry’ s region-coding system and the hacker who thumbs his
nose at it; and many others who traverse the changing technological,
ethical, and legal landscape of the network age. But the rise of
digital culture has created a powerful backlash: Under the banner of
fighting piracy and protecting copyright, influential companies are
threatening to turn back the clock on our laws and our technology until
our computers become crippled, our televisions dumbed-down, our consumer
electronics devices handcuffed– and the Internet crushed as a free and
open medium. Darknet shows that there’ s a sensible middle-ground
between corporate media and digital thieves, but both sides refuse to
see it.

To get a quick idea of the the major themes of the book
listen to the Denise Howell
interview Lasica
.

For more information, see the
Darknet blog
where there are excerpts from the book, links to darknets.
and much more.

Update on UCITA

Posted in Technology & Society on July 15th, 2005

New Battle Brews Over UCITA, Software Licensing Terms. by Patrick Thibodeau,
Computerworld, July 11, 2005.

ACM Tech News notes that,
“Although state-by-state adoption of the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) was shot down by heavy resistance, critics contend that the act is still very influential, and the software users who led the opposition are developing their own model software-licensing law.” The ComputerWorld article says that the
Americans for Fair Electronic Commerce Transactions (AFFECT) has “been quietly drafting its own model software-licensing law. Its concern is that courts may use UCITA as a reference point in legal disputes, giving vendors a victory through the legal system that they couldn’t gain in state legislatures.”

The model bill will be based on a set of principles AFFECT developed earlier this year. For instance, UCITA all but barred any type of reverse-engineering of a software product. But AFFECT argues in its principles that “sellers marketing to the general public should not prohibit lawful study of a product, including taking apart the product.”

Geist on ICANN

Posted in Technology & Society on July 15th, 2005

The battle for control of the Internet, by Michael Geist, Toronto Star, July 11, 2005. [free registration required]

Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and
E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law and writes a regular column for the Toronto Star. In this column he breaks
down the issues about Internet governance and Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Highly recommended.

Internet governance is a thorny issue made more complicated by the
dizzying array of meetings and policy documents. Stripped to the core,
however, the issue is now simply about control — control over core
functions of the Internet and control over the policy making levers
that impact Internet free speech, privacy, and e-commerce.

New Hardware DRM Coming

Posted in Technology & Society on July 15th, 2005

MicrosoftÕs OPM for the masses. by Peter Rojas, Endgadget, Jul 14, 2005.
From “The Clicker, ” a weekly column on television and technology.

Microsoft’s next operating system, “Longhorn,” will, according to this article, have something called PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path Ð Output Protection Management), which “is the first play in MicrosoftÕs game plan to ensure that protected content stays protected.” This technology will
detect the capabilities of your computer monitor and manage what, if anything, gets sent to it. This will be one more way that the combination of operating systems and hardware will be able to impose digital rights management (DRM) on users and interfere with your unrestricted use of your hardware.

So what will happen when you try to play premium content on your incompatible monitor? If youÕre ÒluckyÓ, the content will go through a resolution constrictor. The purpose of this constrictor is to down-sample high-resolution content to below a certain number of pixels. The newly down-sampled content is then blown back up to match the resolution of your monitor. This is much like when you shrink a JPEG and then zoom into it. Much of the clarity is lost. The result is a picture far fuzzier than it need be.

If OPM determines that your monitor falls below the security restrictions, … you could be greeted with a Òpolite message explaining that [your monitor] doesnÕt meet security requirements.Ó

Who determines when you get the restrictor and when you get the black screen? You guessed it: the content owner does.

As the article notes, this is not just a Microsoft invention. “The next generation of digital content will, by and large, be protected to the display.”

Thanks to Slashdot.

RFID? Trust Us. We’re Experts.

Posted in Technology & Society on July 15th, 2005

Could broad anti-RFID laws cause problems?, by Anne Broache CNET News.com. July 14, 2005.

This article discusses radio frequency identification (RFID) tags and possible limits on their use being proposed by law makers. The article reports on
a panel discussion ‘designed to address the outcry from “Luddite privacy people who don’t like this new technology.”‘ The panel was hosted by the American Electronics Association (motto: “Advancing the Business of Technology”). When problems were discussed, “panelists said they weren’t worried.” Thirteen federal government agencies are currently using or plan to use the technology including the Government Printing Office (see: Contactless traveling By Maury Wright, EDN, 7/7/2005).

There are three things that worry me about many discussions of technology policy. First when those in favor of technological change use ad hominem arguments and terms like “Luddite” rather than address issues. Second, when self-appointed experts say they aren’t worried. Third, when “discussions” are hosted by true believers and business interests. Check. Check. Check.
For some other views and more about RFID, see
“RFID opposition news” at wikipedia and No RFIDs at SF Public Library at LibrarianActivist.org, July 11, 2005.

Your privacy and Google

Posted in Technology & Society on July 15th, 2005

Google balances privacy, reach By Elinor Mills, CNET News.com, July 14, 2005.

Google has lots and lots of information about users of Google’s search engine and other products (Gmail, Desktop Search, Web Accelerator). And Google keeps it for a long long time. Privacy advocates, this story notes, say that “…you realize Google can have a lot of personal
information about individuals’ Internet habits–e-mail, saving search
history, images, personal information from (social network site) Orkut–it
represents a significant threat to privacy.”
And more:

Kevin Bankston, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said
Google is amassing data that could create some of the most detailed
individual profiles ever devised.
“Your search history shows your associations, beliefs, perhaps your medical
problems. The things you Google for define you,” Bankston said.

This article goes into the details, what Google promises about privacy and what it does not, and more…

Two Free Novels

Posted in Open Access on July 14th, 2005

Slashdot reports
“Two prominent science fiction authors have recently released their newest novels as free downloads to coincide with their in-store releases.”

Google Bias?

Posted in Technology & Society on July 14th, 2005

Google’s Bias for Bigness. By Kelly Hearn, AlterNet, July 14, 2005.

Many of us rely on Google daily and marvel at how well it ranks web pages and even long for library indexing to do as well. By definition, Google ranks popular pages (as measured by links to them) higher than less popular pages. But frequent Google users know that “popularity” does not always equal “quality” or even “what we need.”
Because Google guards its algorithms closely, we can only judge its accuracy indirectly by evaluating results and comparing rankings.

In that context, this article about Google news ranking provides some useful speculation and insights into our reliance on search engines.

The upshot is that Google’s proposed change isn’t just a misguided and disheartening quest to mainstream online news. It’s a demoralizing metamorphosis from a catch-all (mostly) uncensored news aggregator with egalitarian undertones to a purveyor of corporate-driven coverage suitable only for what Lawrence Weschler, formerly of the New Yorker, calls the “temporal frenzy that has come to characterize the increasingly peg-driven, niche-slotted, attention-squeezed, sound-bite media environment of recent years.”

Critique of the creative commons

Posted in Copyright on July 14th, 2005

The Libre Society

David M. Berry & Giles Moss have recently written a polemic critiquing the creative commons (see the extended entry for the full article). They argue that the Creative Commons project — because it relies on an “ideology and worldview that agrees too readily with that of the global ‘creative’ and media industries,” and is “quick to accept the specious claims of neo-classical economics, with its myopic ‘incentive’ models of creativity and an instrumental view of culture as a resource” — has failed to expand the space available for the political. They argue that Lessig’s view of the commons is not “Res Communes” which lies outside of the property system (like air, and water), but instead is within the “realm of private ownership (Res Privatae)” thus cramping the view of culture and the commons as largely a capitalist construct.

In response, Berry and Moss have created the Libre Society and launched the Libre Commons project, “a set of licenses which reject the legalistic and ‘culture as resource’ position of the Creative Commons and instead hope to develop a concept of the creative multitude through political action and ethical practices.

Read their Libre Manisfesto (PDF) and their article in last month’s “Free Software Magazine” below.
Read the rest of this entry »