Category: Regulation

.xxx Porno Domain Approved

.xxx Domain For Pornos ApprovedSaucy sensation seekers and sleazy surfers will be rewarded with their very own porn-friendly set of .xxx domains before the end of the year.

The Web’s virtual red-light district has been approved by ICANN, the non-profit organization responsible for Internet addresses.

ICANN has announced that it is working with the ICM Registry to finalise the new top-level domain details (other top-level domains awaiting a decision from ICANN are .asia, .mail, and .tel)

In an interview last year, Stuart Lawley, chairman of the ICM Registry, stated that .xxx domain names would cost around US$60 (~£32 ~€47.8) and have no restrictions on content, so long as sexually explicit material only featured adults.

“Apart from child pornography, which is completely illegal, we’re really not in the content-monitoring business,” he said.

.xxx Domain For Pornos ApprovedIt is hoped that pornsters will voluntarily shift from their current .com addresses, thus making it easier for parents to filter out adult material, but in an industry not exactly renowned for its high moral stance, we anticipate that not all will be wiling to switch from their lucrative, high profile domains.

Moreover, with the $60 price tag being around ten times higher than the cost of many dot-com names, we suspect that many porno kings will stick with the cheapest option. The wannabe-Bonking Baron’s that don’t currently have established sites with prize domain names are bound to pile into the .xxx domains – either to use them or with the hope of selling them on.

It’s common knowledge that the ‘right’ porn domain can bring a near guaranteed financial fortune. The long disputed sex.com domain is widely thought to have brought in up to $1m/month, simply from banner ads.

The ICM Registry plans to handle the technical aspects of running the master database of .xxx sex sites, with the non-profit International Foundation For Online Responsibility (IFFOR) charged with setting the rules for the .xxx domain.

The IFFOR will have a seven-person board of directors, featuring a selection of bizarre job titles such as “child advocacy advocate” and “free-expression aficionado” along with some big-hatted, cheroot smoking, pink Chevvy-driving dude from the adult entertainment industry.

.xxx Domain For Pornos ApprovedUnlike the milk-snatcher Margaret Thatcher, the ICANN’s decision proves that they are definitely for turning – in November 2000, the ICANN staff rejected ICM Registry’s first application after objecting to domains such as .kids and .xxx.

An outrage of politicians were quick to deride the decision with the Republican Fred Upton demanding to know why ICANN didn’t approve the .xxx domain “as a means of protecting our kids from the awful, awful filth, which is sometimes widespread on the Internet”.

With a little less hand-wringing, Sen Joseph Lieberman complained to a federal commission that the domain would be an essential means to force adult Webmasters to “abide by the same standard as the proprietor of an X-rated movie theatre”.

The American Civil Liberties Union has expressed its concerns about .xxx domains, suggesting that some uptight nations may force sites dealing with sensitive topics such as gay rights, homosexuality or birth control into the easily blocked .xxx zone.

ICM Registry – Sponsored Voluntary Adult TLD Application
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
International Foundation for Online Responsibility

Italian DJ Gets Huge Fine For Copied MP3s

DJ gets biggest ever fine for playing pirated MP3sA “well known” Italian DJ could be hit with a record-breaking fine of up to 1.4 million euros ($1.8 million, £968,000) for using thousands of pirate music files in a nightclub near Rome, police said on Wednesday.

Police in the town of Rieti, near Rome, said they raided a popular nightclub earlier this week as part of a king-size crackdown on piracy and seized 500 illegally copied music videos and more than 2,000 MP3 music files.

The get-tough operation, targeting radio stations and clubs around the region, was led by the Fiscal Police (Guardia Di Financa, that deal with financial crime), who also seized a large quantity of “audiovisual material” and software.

There are a lot of inaccurate reports floating around about this and we wanted to get the full story, so called up the FIMI in Italy. They told us that the copyright law in Italy dates back to 1941 but was most recently updated a year ago. Under the law the DJ was fined 100 Euro ($130, £69) per copied track, this figure was then doubled to 500,000 Euro. Only if the fine is not paid within 60 days, will it increase to 1.4m.

The reason for the doubling was unclear. Under Italian law, the precise details of the case are not made public until the case comes to court.

The DJ is free to appeal against the fine. Once the fine has been finalised, the money can be paid off monthly.

“For the MP3 files, which were kept on the DJ’s personal computer, the DJ has received a fine of 1.4 million euros,” Rieti finance police said in a statement (the fine is subject to administrative recourse). The DJ may also be subject to further criminal sanctions.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) said the fine was the biggest ever slapped on an individual for unlawful music copying and the use of copyrighted music in the MP3 format.

“We are pleased with the fine imposed by the Rieti Fiscal police,” said Director of the Italian Recording Industry Association (FIMI) Enzo Mazza.

He continued, “This deejay was touring clubs and making money out of the music he played – while those who had invested time, talent, hard work and money into creating the music in the first place did not get a cent. We hope this precedent will serve as a deterrent for those who are thinking of doing the same.”

Seeing as venues already pay money to the collection societies for public dance licenses we find the size of this fine a little baffling.

It could certainly be argued that DJs can act as ambassadors for new music (and therefore the music companies) with some high-profile DJs having a considerable influence on the record buying public.

After all, why else would record companies ply DJs with endless vinyl/promos and other inducements in the hope of getting their tunes played?

Perhaps now that times are more lean for the record companies, they’re cutting back on the freebies.

It appears the line between theft and promotion can sometimes be a blurred one, and we’re not convinced that punishing DJs with such enormous fines is the way the record industry should be protecting their sales…

Dead Granny sued by RIAA – A Serious Own Goal

RIAA issues legal action to dead womanIf they weren’t already unpopular enough with a large part of the online music file sharers, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has managed to score a spectacular PR own goal by suing a dead woman for swapping music files.

The Associated Press reported that investigators at the RIAA identified Gertrude Walton as a prolific sharer known as “smittenedkitten” and set about bringing this evil distributor of music to justice.

A federal lawsuit was duly filed, with the RIAA claiming that Mrs Walton had shared more than 700 songs through P2P networks.

But there was a slight problem: the defendant was a computer-illiterate 83-year-old grandmother who has never owned a computer.

And there was an even bigger problem: she had died the month before the lawsuit was filed.

After being notified of the upcoming legal action, the dead woman’s daughter, Robin Chianumba, faxed a copy of her mother’s death certificate to RIAA adding, “I am pretty sure she is not going to leave Greenwood Memorial Park (where she is buried) to attend the hearing”.

This king size cock-up does nothing to RIAA’s bully boy reputation. In 2003 the association successfully sued a twelve year-old girl for copyright infringement after her hard drive was found to be harbouring an MP3 file of her favourite TV show. Her working class parents were forced to shell out two thousand dollars in a settlement.

RIAA
Boycott RIAA

Michael Powell, FCC Chair to Go

Michael Powell FCCThe Wall Street Journal is reporting that US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman, Michael Powell, will be leaving his position today.

The rumours of his departure have been circulating for a long time, but what is unexpected is that he is resigning the day after George Bush’s inauguration.

Powell has had his detractors and his supporters. He’s acted as a liberaliser – opening up the VoIP market, and, in some peoples eyes, a restrictor – last year he authorised fines in excess of $7.7 million for indecent programming.

He will, for us, for ever be remembered for calling a TiVo “God’s machine“.

Overall we think he’s been an enthusiastic supporter of technology advances. We hope his replacement will show a similar enthusiasm.

WSJ – FCC Chairman Powell Plans to Step Down (reg. req.)
Seattle Post-Intelligencer – Officials: FCC Chairman Powell to resign

Ofcom Strategic Review of Telecommunications Gets UK Parliament Inquiry

The UK House of Commons launched an inquiry into Ofcom’s Strategic Review of Telecommunications (SRT) yesterday.

Ofcom, the uber-regulator that among other things, oversees telecoms in the UK, started its SRT in January 2004. It was long overdue in the eyes of many, as it was the first comprehensive strategic review of the UK telecommunications sector for 13 years.

Now the UK House of Commons, Trade and Industry Committee will be looking into the workings and results of the SRT, in particular how it relates to the “extensiveness and competitiveness” of broadband in the UK.

The SRT is divided in to three phases; Current position and prospects for the telecommunications sector; Options for Ofcom’s strategic approach to telecommunications regulation; and Proposals; the first phase was published at the end of April.

Ofcom identified two key problems in Phase One; an unstable market structure in fixed telecoms, dominated by BT and with alternative providers that are, in the main, fragmented and of limited scale; BT’s control of the UK-wide access network hadn’t been addressed to date. They then posed some questions; primarily about the future of BT.

Phase Two was published in November 04 and used some relatively strong language (pretty diplomatic in the normal, non-Quango world), which we summarised as “Ofcom to BT: Equivalence or else”. It’s still open for public consultation until 3 February 2005.

Yesterdays announcement from the Trade and Industry Committee, said in the light of the Committee’s Report on the UK Broadband Market, the inquiry will be looking into OfCom’s STR process to date, the interim conclusions reached in the Phase Two document, and the direction of the remainder of the Review. They’ll be paying particular attention how it relates to the competitiveness of the broadband market in the UK, including local loop unbundling, and the “functional separation of British Telecom”.

A spokeperson at OfCom told us that they “had already briefed the Committee” and “welcomed their interest” in the SRT. When we asked about the previously expected Spring delivery of SRT Phase 3, we were told that they “still planned” to meet it. Frankly they were playing their cards pretty close to their chest.

We called the office of the Committee, but given the 21 enquiries they have on currently, no one was available for comment at the time of publishing the story.

If you have any view on the area covered by the Committee, they’re asking for written evidence on these or any other related issues by Friday 18 February 2005 via email ([email protected]). If you do write please CC ([email protected]) us in, we’d be interested in see the issues raised.


Alerted by OfcomWatch
Trade and Industry Select Committee
Ofcom – Strategic Review of Telecommunications

Ofcom Release Ultra Wideband (UWB) Document

Ofcom released a consultation document today on ultra wideband (UWB) in the UK.

Given Ofcom’s statutory duties under the Communications Act 2003 to ensure the optimal use of the radio spectrum under its management, they should be keen on UWB.

The strength of UWB also causes its problems. By simultaneously transmitting over a wide range of frequencies (around 3.1 – 10.6GHz, if you’re interested), UWB is able to achieve higher data transfer rate than other wireless technologies.

By spreading over these frequencies it has the possibility of interfering with services that currently operate in or around these services, such as 3G, broadband fixed wireless access and radio astronomy.

Back in May 2004, Ofcom commissioned Mason Communications and DotEcon to produce an independent report in to UWB. Delivered in December 2004 (Read the final report, all 218 pages of PDF fun), it looked at the advantages to the UK economy of allowing UWB applications and the disadvantages of increased interference to existing radio spectrum users.

The report focuses on the use of UWB to create a Personal Area Network (PAN) with examples of usage being; providing wireless connections between DVD players, displays and speakers; and using them for high speed wireless links between digital cameras and computers.

While acknowledging interference is likely, it’s clear that Ofcom feels this should be weighed carefully against UWB’s potential benefits. To check this interference, the suggestion is to use a technical ‘mask’, controlling the amount of power that could be used at different frequencies, in an attempt to reduce the impact of interference.

The US regulator has already authorised UWB on a licence-exempt basis, but Ofcom consider the US specification to be inappropriate for the UK. Their proposal is that if UWB is allowed, it should be on a licence-exempt basis, but be limited to the same in-band power levels as permitted in the US, but have tighter out-of-band limits.

Ofcom point out that there is a need to come to a decision soon, fearing US-built UWB devices could be imported in to the UK.

All of these add up to a big pressure on the frequency users that would be affected. It will be interesting to see what their reaction will be during the consultation period which closes 24 March 2005.

Ofcom Ultra Wideband consultation document
Mason Communications and DotEcon final report

European Networked and Electronic Media (NEM) initiative launches

How Europeans receive their digital entertainment in the future could change, following an event in Nice last week. At the launch of the bold and ambitious Networked and Electronic Media (NEM) initiative, the European Commission (EC) announced their intention to form an integrated, interoperable platform. Its broad scope stretches from the way media is created, through each of the stages of its distribution, to its playback.

The EC want its citizens to be able to locate the content they desire and have it delivered seamlessly, when on the move, at home or at work, no matter who supplies the devices, network, content, or content protection scheme.

With interconnectivity as its goal, it is fortunate that over 120 experts were there to share the vision and hear pledges of active support from companies such as Nokia, Intel, Philips, Alcatel, France Telecom, Thomson and Telefonica.

It might initially appear to be surprising that companies in direct competition are keen to work together, but again and again speakers stated they could not see incompatible, stand-alone solutions working. A long-term strategy for the evolution and convergence of technologies and services would be required.

The EC is being pragmatic in its approach. They have identified that many standards bodies have, and continue to, define standards in the areas that NEM encompasses, but recognise that some of these standards overlap. The NEM approach is to take a serious look at what’s available and what’s in the pipeline, pick out the best, integrate them together and identify where the gaps are. Where it finds holes, it will develop standards to fill them.

While the global access to content is not a unique idea, what is significant is that such a large and powerful organisation has stated its desire for it to be fully open and interoperable – not restricting the consumers choice at any stage in the process.

This is bound to please, if not surprise, many individuals and user organisations who feel that the wishes of the holder of rights to content are normally considered over and above those of the consumer. Following the keynote earlier in the week of EC Director João Da Silva, they now know they have a supporter within the higher echelons of the European Commission.

Many feel that the most difficult and challenging area for the EC will be to identify a solution for interoperating Digital Rights Management (DRM) schemes. Currently DRM solutions are incompatible – locking certain types of purchased content, making them unplayable on all platforms.

With the potential of having a percentage of every media transaction that takes place globally, the prize for being the supplier of the world’s dominant DRM scheme is huge. This leads the companies who feel they have a chance in controlling it to not be very open to sharing.

Although entertainment is an obvious first step, it will encompass the remote provisions of healthcare, energy efficiency and control of the Smart Home. The over-arching initiative amalgamates the work of many currently running research projects that the EC has been funding for a number of years.

The NEM is a ten-year project, which in the everything-immediately age we live in, might seem like a lifetime away, but it’s important to remember that the digital delivery of media stretches a long way into the future. Decisions made and solutions selected now will have far reaching consequences.

This piece was featured on the BBC Web site.

MPAA Judge Finds ‘bulldozer’ approach ‘improper’

Last week, members of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) filed 11 lawsuits against hundreds of people they accused of using file-sharing networks to share infringing copies of movies. However, the Federal Judge ruled the ‘bulldozer’ approach improper, ordering that the case should be put on hold for all but one of the defendants.

The move by the MPAA to group defendants into arbitrarily-joined actions was probably thought of as a ‘neat’ and easy way to get the message across to other US citizens participating in file sharing. ‘Bulk’ suing could also save a heck of a lot of paper shuffling and administration work.

The MPAA sued groups of “Does” (John Doe) identified by numerical IP address and requested the discovery of names from the users’ Internet Service Providers (ISPs). However, Judge William Alsup ruled that because claims against the 12 defendants were unrelated, suing them together into one big case was improper. “Such joinder may be an attempt to circumvent the filing fees by grouping defendants into arbitrarily-joined actions but it could nonetheless appear improper under Rule 20,” the order states.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed friend-of-the-court briefs, objecting to similar misjoinder in many of the cases filed by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) against alleged infringers.

“This decision helps to give due process rights to the Internet users accused of infringement,” said EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer. “Lumping them together makes it more difficult for everyone to defend against these claims.” EFF is also concerned about the movie studios’ failure to produce evidence of infringement against even Doe #1 in this case.

In a separate case, Warner Brothers Entertainment has secured a $309,600 judgement against an actor for allegedly making promotional ‘screener’ copies of ‘The Last Samurai’ and ‘Mystic River’ available for bootleg DVD copying and unauthorised Internet trading.

Carmine Caridi, a former recurring actor on ‘NYPD Blue,’ is accused of copyright infringement and is facing a default judgement of $150,000 per film and $9,600 in attorney fees. Caridi and co-defendant Russell Sprague were caught because the screeners were individually watermarked for each recipient.

According to Warner Brothers, Carmine Caridi, as a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, signed an agreement before he received the 2003 awards season screeners promising not to circulate them. It is believed that he immediately sent the VHS screeners to another address where they were copied onto DVD and converted to digital files that were posted on the Internet.

FCC Approves First Software-Defined Radio (SDR)

The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has announced its approval of the first software-defined radio (SDR) device allowed in the United States. The new equipment will allow users to share limited airspace, increase flexibility, and reduce interference concerns. In a move that may prove to be a radio technology revolution, the industry is now beset with pioneering work to find more creative and efficient use of airwaves in order to offer benefits to consumers.

Software-defined radio, sometimes shortened to software radio (SR), refers to wireless communication in which the transmitter modulation is generated or defined by a computer, and the receiver uses a computer to recover the signal intelligence. To select the desired modulation type, the proper programs must be run by microcomputers that control the transmitter and receiver.

However, the most significant asset of SDR is versatility. For instance, wireless systems employ protocols that vary from one service to another – even in the same type of service – whereas a single SDR set with an all-inclusive software repertoire can be used in any mode, anywhere in the world. Software defined radios can change the frequency range, modulation type or output power of a radio device without making changes to hardware components. This programmable capacity permits radios to be highly adaptable to changing needs, protocols and environments.

The ultimate goal of SDR is to provide a single radio transceiver capable of playing the roles of the cordless telephone, mobile phone, wireless fax, wireless e-mail system, pager, wireless videoconferencing unit, wireless Web browser, Global Positioning System (GPS) unit, and other functions, operable from any location.

The FCC’s approval gives the go-ahead to Vanu, a software development company, for a cellular base station transmitter. Vanu’s Radio GSM Base Station, which is based on a HP ProLiant server running Linux coupled with ADC Telecommunications’ Digivance radio subsystem, can support multiple cellular technologies and frequencies at the same time and can be modified in the future without any hardware changes. The technology has the potential to lower costs and provide new flexibility in wireless networks, thereby changing the entire cost structure over time. The first users will be military and public safety officials.

FCC

Ofcom to BT: Equivalence or else

After a long period of deliberation Ofcom, the UK regulator, has come to its conclusion on the Strategic Review of Telecommunications Phase 2 (SRT 2 to those in the know). It won’t be forcing the split of BT Retail and BT Wholesale.

For a very long time, most companies in the UK telecoms market have bemoaned BT Retail getting a better deal from BT Wholesale (they own the network) than they were able to achieve. In the competitor’s eyes, the market hasn’t been balanced. Many felt that BT has been expert in ‘playing’ the regulator, especially Ofcom’s previous rendition, OfTel – only making changes just before they were forced.

In SRT 2 Ofcom investigated three options, Full deregulation; Enterprise Act investigation; BT to deliver real equality of access. They’ve come down on the side of the latter, in their words

“Ofcom calls on BT to provide prompt and clear proposals which will achieve these behavioural changes and bring about the level of confidence required.”

and if equality isn’t achieved, they threaten to use the second; an investigation into the market under the Enterprise Act 2002, with the potential for a subsequent referral to the Competition Commission.

In theory, when equal access to the network is given, the need for Local Loop Unbundling (LLU) to provide competing broadband services will be reduced.

When we spoke to Video Networks, the company behind the London-based IP VOD-services, they said the news today would “not impact their LLU plans”. EasyNet, a significant unbundler, didn’t get back to us before we went to press.

The SRT 2 is now open for public consultation until 3 February 2005.

It would appear that the threats from Christopher Bland, Chair of BT, in the Telegraph at the weekend that “No BT would equal No Broadband” were unnecessary.
Update: OfcomWatch comment