Legal – Page 22 – Digital-Lifestyles

EU iTunes Expands to 9 Further Countries

Now customers in Austria, Belgium, Finland, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal and Spain have their own EU iTunes with the same features and price of €0.99 per song. A better deal than their UK neighbours who pay £0.79 (€1.16) per track since iTunes opened its store there in June. This 17% extra loading prompted the Consumer’s Association to ask the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to investigate the pricing difference, claiming it is a potential breach of the competition law.

With the launch of EU iTunes Apple now reaches customers in almost 70 percent of the global music market, and it also announced that it will launch the iTunes Music Store in Canada this November.

The EU iTunes Music Store features over 700,000 songs from all four major music companies and more than 100 independent record labels. It also features exclusive tracks from leading worldwide artists, including Anastacia, Marc Anthony, Andrea Bocelli, Black Eyed Peas, Destiny’s Child, Bob Marley, George Michael, The Prodigy, Gwen Stefani, Travis and Zucchero.

EU iTunes has the same personal use rights as in the US, UK, France and Germany. Users are allowed to play songs on up to five personal computers, burn a single song onto CDs an unlimited number of times, burn the same playlist up to seven times and listen to their music on an unlimited number of iPods.

The EU iTunes Music Store offers PC and Mac users the same features. iMix playlist sharing, the dynamic ‘Party Shuffle’ playlist, over 8,000 audiobooks, which can be listened to on any PC, Mac or iPod, and ‘Artist Alert’ email service. And last but not least, automatic WMA to AAC conversion, enabling Windows users to automatically create iTunes versions of songs encoded in unprotected WMA.

iTunes for Mac and Windows includes the EU iTunes Music Store and is available as a free download immediately from their Website. The EU iTunes Music Store works, of course, with the Euro, and purchase and download of songs requires a valid credit card – that is until Apple finds a company like PayPal to partner up with, as Naptser did this week.

Apple iTunes Music Store

Irish File Sharers Risk Legal Action – IRMA

Following the pattern of the music associations in the USA and UK, the IRMA (Irish Recorded Music Association) is starting to put pressure on music file sharers. They told Digital Lifestyles that the popularity of P2P is strong in Ireland – “Anything that happens there happens here too.”

Dick Doyle, Director General of IRMA explained that they will soon run a campaign sending out messages to P2P users warning them to avoid using file sharing programmes and advising them to disable the share feature. While it is true that a large part of their business involves the movement of copyrighted material, BitTorrent and its pals Kazaa and eDonkey are also being used for legitimate content.

He went on to tell us that they are in the process of litigating, but that it would take a further 2-3 months. “We are following what the US did a few years ago – suing the end users. We ask the ISPs to disclose the identification of P2P users, and if they don’t, we take them to court. We do want to retain a good relationship with the ISPs though.”

So, how much of the money goes to the artists in Ireland then? “If huge payments are made we will of course share these with the artists”, says Doyle.

IRMA

Black Duck’s protexIP – Safer Open Source Code Usage

Open source can immediately prompt the words ‘law suit’ in some peoples’ minds, but Black Duck have introduced a software platform that helps developers catch and resolve potential intellectual property disputes.

A large software project may involve code and components from many sources – increasingly parts of a project may have open source origins. It’s highly likely that there will be some software on the computer that you’re using to read this now that will depend on open source components – and indeed the core of the internet depends on open source applications such as Apache.

Recently, some high profile conflicts between source code owners and developers has led to some very expensive and high profile legal challenges. The number of licenses, projects and obligations that a company needs to be aware of when looking to make a product that may involve open source code is immense – and checking and analysing what needs to be done, or what may happen if there is a conflict, is expensive and time-consuming.

Black Duck’s protexIP suite informs developers of code origins, license obligations and potential violations by producing a check list of items for them to resolve. Users can even run ‘whatif’ queries on code combinations.

The product is based around Black Duck’s 50gb knowledge base with information on more than 225 licenses. The company also uses spiders to monitor some 250 key open source projects to keep protexIP up to date.

“As open source and third party components proliferate and become nested in increasingly complex applications, the challenge of assuring compliance with licensing obligations becomes overwhelming without a comprehensive compliance platform,” said Karen Copenhaver, executive vice president and general counsel of Black Duck. “protexIP/license management empowers the lawyer’s oversight of the development process, from helping define and implement open source policy to approval of software release.”

Annual subscription packages start at US$9,500 (€7,595) for up to 2 seats. protexIP/license management customers must also subscribe to a protexIP/development package, which start at $12,500 (€9,993) for up to 5 seats.

protexIP

Halo 2 Hit by Pirates

A version of Bungie’s new Halo 2 game has been leaked onto the internet, a month before the game is due for release. The game is set for launch on November 9th – and is one of the most eagerly awaited video games of all time.

The version in question is a PAL XBox edition, in French. In order to make use of the pirated copy, a downloader would have to make a DVD from an ISO file, and this would only work on a modified console. Also, I don’t fancy your chances at getting it to work with XBox Live. Given the size of the file and the sheer awkwardness involved in getting it to run, it’s dubious that the leak will affect sales of the game even minutely. However, theft and piracy are still offences and Bungie is not the first high-profile company to be the victim of this sort of crime: a section of Valve’s Half-Life 2 source code relating to Steam was stolen some months ago. It seems that the more demand there is for a title, the greater the impulse to rip it off – will this disruptive, and quite frankly boring, hacker hobby be inevitable for all future big-budget games? I sincerely hope not.

Microsoft issued a statement regarding the leak, asking for anyone with information to come forward.

“Microsoft has learned that a version of Halo 2 has been posted to various newsgroups and web sites. We consider downloading this code or making it available for others to download as theft. We are currently investigating the source of this leak with the appropriate authorities. Pending the result of our investigation, we do not have further comment. Microsoft takes the integrity of its intellectual property extremely seriously, and we are aggressively pursuing the source of this illegal act. The launch of Halo 2 worldwide remains unaffected. We’re asking anyone with information on the source of this leak to contact Microsoft at 1-800-RULEGIT or send email to [email protected].”

Bungie

OS X on XP

Ah, the legally troubling world of emulation. MSX, a company based in Hawaii, have announced the release of their CherryOS – an application that allows the owner of any reasonably well-specified PC to turn it into a Macintosh G4, if they so choose.

The G4 is based on on IBM’s PowerPC architecture and as such is radically different from Intel’s x86 platform – so the host processor’s instruction set has to be translated from one platform to the other. Emulation effectively creates a virtual machine, in this case a G4, within the other computer’s operating system, in this case a PC. CherryOS emulates a G4 so well that all of the system’s hardware resources, an area where most emulators usually fall down, are accessible. Getting Firewire, USB, PCMCIA and Ethernet all to work well can’t have been easy.

Processor overheads and memory use are another traditional sticking point for emulators since the emulator has to be stored somewhere and instructions have to be translated, but MSX claim that CherryOS uses up only 20% of a host PC’s resources.

Users won’t be able to do much with their virtual G4 unless they install an operating system on it. MSX assure that OS X, available from Apple for about US$149 (€120), works fine.

Apple won’t be pleased: even if the product is 100% legal, didn’t reverse engineer any of their hardware or use any Apple code, it means users can now run Macintosh applications on hardware that is considerably cheaper (and less stylish) than their own kit.

Arben Kryeziu, CherryOS inventor says he created the application because he grew tired carrying a PC and mac around with him. “Think about it,” he said, “Now about 600 million PC users can have the Mac advantage. One computer to use all software and if PC users would use Mac software to get email, perhaps they would avoid viruses, Trojans and spy-ware.” True, but one could argue that about Linux, which is more popular than OS X. What else have you got?

He also went on to describe some of the advantages CherryOS brings: “You can build and test applications for a Mac on your development PC, test web site design for Mac web browsers without having to buy the hardware, run OS X, the world’s best operating system, on a less expensive hardware platform and use your favourite Mac apps on a PC.”

CherryOS

RIAA Suffers Setback

The Recording Industry Association of America has suffered a setback in its John Doe pursuit of illegal file sharers, as the Supreme Court has now denied their demand that Verizon and other ISPs identify customers whom the RIAA believe are sharing infringing music.

Previously, the RIAA had been pursuing ISP Verizon with subpoenas demanding subscriber details without actually knowing who their targets where. Anonymous individuals were picked out by investigating traffic and file sharing on peer to peer networks, though identities are often hidden through aliases. Let’s face it, someone sharing files illegally would have to be pretty daft to give their real details as a user name and profile.

Verizon refused the demands from the RIAA on the grounds that, due to P2P networks’ very nature, they themselves did not store infringing material – it’s all stored on individuals’ own PCs. They argue that they cannot remove files or police their customers for every single infringing action.

The Supreme Court agrees with them, and the RIAA will now have to try a different strategy, instead of using the DMCA as a means to issue subpoenas to ISPs. “The Supreme Court’s refusal to take the case leaves the DC Circuit’s well-reasoned opinion as law: The DMCA doesn’t give the RIAA a blank fishing license to issue subpoenas and invade Internet users’ privacy,” said EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer.

In recent weeks the RIAA has stepped up its activity against illegal file sharers by launching a further 762 cases, including suing individuals at 26 different schools. In the past, each case has netted an average of US$3000 (€2,473), none of which goes to the artists who are losing money.

The EFF

The RIAA

Orb Networks’ PC Content Sharing

Next up in the media portal race is a service from Orb Networks. Their technology allows PC users to stream content off their home computer to any other compatible device that’s connected to the internet. This means that you can watch programmes you’ve recorded using your Windows Media Centre PC on a compatible mobile phone of PDA almost anywhere.

To do this, Orbs’s technology takes music or video from the user’s PC and then determines the best format, codec and bit rate for the target device and then streams it from your home internet connection to the device you’ve requested it from.

Orb intend to expand the product beyond PC users – they want PVRs to incorporate the technology also, which will prove trickier. Indeed, TiVo have just had a lucky scrape when they had a similar feature approved by the FCC earlier this year, after criticism from the MPAA over its security.

Tim Bajarin president of Creative Strategies at Orb Networks explains why they’ve produced their media portal: “Many of today’s digital entertainment devices and services place limitations on the amount or type of content consumers can access. People may be able to watch live television remotely from a cell phone or notebook, but are restricted to watching only a handful of stations. Additionally, today’s digital music services often try to lock users into using one particular device and media player. Very simply put, Orb takes away these boundaries giving the consumer what they want – uninhibited, spontaneous remote access to all of their digital home media.”

Content providers media companies don’t want their content going anywhere near the internet – even if you technically have a right to view it when ever you like. Expect Orb Networks to come under fire from the usual favourites when the service launches in mid-November. When available, it’ll cost subscribers US$9.99 (€8.11) a month, or US$80 (€65) a year.

James Behrens, chief executive officer of Orb Networks said in a statement: “Orb Networks has developed a brand new way for people to be connected to their digital media all the time from anywhere in the world. We have found a way to bring consumers what they want – simple access at any time. Consumers can watch live TV on their laptop, schedule a DVR recording through their PDA, or even listen to their music on their cell phone while jogging, biking or shopping.”

Orb Networks

OFT’s Spam Crackdown

The Office of Fair Trading, a UK government organisation set up to protect consumers, has launched a new initiative to protect internet users from spam and misleading websites. The OFT are promoting global co-operation at a conference in London today bringing together consumer protection, data protection and telecommunications agencies from more than 20 countries.

John Vickers, OFT Chair, said in a statement: “Spam is not just annoying and intrusive. It gets in the way of legitimate e-commerce, and is often a vehicle for scams and computer viruses. International collaboration by enforcement agencies, the efforts of the computer and communications industries, and smart consumers at home (who take steps to protect themselves) are all needed to combat the internet scammers.”

To date, the OFT has fought a couple of successful actions against spammers and scam sites – but with a lack of results from other global initiatives, it remains to be seen if this latest conference will have any effect. Global spam traffic increases every week, and the numbers of scam sites, viruses and spyware applications is simply going up, not down.

The OFT’s main policy at the moment is to educate the public – their site has the usual hints and advice for email and web users, but these are hardly “tips to help you fight back”. A spam filter is not “fighting back” by any definition. Fighting back would be giving the anti-spam laws some teeth, and giving global law enforcement agencies the funding and co-ordination to combat spam at it source.

The OFT

US Government Sues its First Spyware Merchant

The US Federal Trade Commission has struck its first blow against spyware manufacturers by shutting down the Seismic Entertainment Productions and smartbot.net.

Seismic are accused of producing and secretly installing a spyware application that nagged users to buy an anti-spyware product from the company. In effect, the application was creating a problem for the PC user and then require US$30 (€24) for removal. The complaint was brought forward by a Washington-based consumer group, the Centre for Democracy and Technology.

The individual behind Seismic is Sanford Wallace, who has been accused of illegal practices and pursued by anti-spam authorities for the past few years. He is currently looking for sympathy on his personal website, and has published the following statement:

“We believe the U.S. government is attempting to enforce federal laws that have yet to be enacted. We feel this is a political move and it is being made at the expense of legal business operations. I am not surprised at all that my companies and I, Sanford Wallace, were picked as the ‘poster boy.’ I find the timing and target of this action to be extremely convenient and painfully obvious. We deny any wrongdoings and plan to pursue all legal protections, remedies and freedoms.”

Given the number of people he’s upset in the past, he’ll have a tough job, but there is currently no anti-spyware legislation in the US – the FTC moved against Wallace under legislation relating to deceptive business practices.

FTC’s media advisory on the Wallace case

Sanford Wallace. Background on Wikipedia

Sun and Kodak Settle Patent Dispute Out of Court – Software Industry Trembles

Sun and Eastman Kodak have settled a long running patent dispute with an out of court payment. Kodak has been chasing Java creator Sun Microsystems for the past two years, claiming that Sun’s wrtie-once, run-anywhere programming platform violates three patents owned by the film company.

Kodak, who don’t produce programming platforms, had been after US$1.06 billion (€859 million) in damages – or roughly 50% of Sun’s entire profit from its hardware sales from the three years from 1998 to 2001. Instead, they accepted US$92 million (€74.6 million) from Sun, without Sun accepting or denying Kodak’s allegations. From their behaviour, it certainly looks like they just harassed Sun until they were paid to go away.

The dispute revolves around three patents that Kodak acquired in 1997 from Wang Laboratories – specifically the way that one program can call another one to assist. This, they say, was similar to the way that Java works. That’s it – there was no identical source code, no dispute over look and feel: it was entirely down to the concept of one program calling another one to help. It’s actually similar to the way that all software works.

Obviously there are concerns amongst software companies that such vague patent claims might destroy the entire industry as companies turn to each other to extract licensing fees for vague and invalid patent disputes. Even if a claim is eventually thrown out, the entire process can be crippling to companies.

I believe that Kodak’s behaviour in this case is especially shameful given that the only reason they have a business in the first place is because they have relied upon the innovations and free exchange of ideas – from generous and insightful people who created the industry before Kodak even arrived. Kodak are old hands at this game given that, in the 70s, they themselves infringed seven patents belonging to Polaroid – an action that took five years for Polaroid to win.

A history of the innovations in photography

Sun’s statement on the dispute resolution