The RIAA is seeking to drop its case against Patti Santangelo, Elektra v. Santangelo, in White Plains, New York. This is the case against a single mom, and mother of five, which received a great deal of press attention in 2005. The case was discussed on Slashdot here, here, and here, was on national television here and here, and received a lot of other press coverage as well. See sampling of articles collected here and see Associated Press coverage here. The RIAA's motion seeks dismissal "without prejudice", which means that they could sue her again for the same thing. Their reason is no doubt to try to insulate themselves from liability for attorney's fees, since a dismissal "with prejudice" would make Ms. Santangelo a "prevailing party" under the Copyright Act, hence eligible for an attorneys fees award. See Capitol v. Foster July 13, 2006, Order Dismissing Case and Finding Defendant to be Eligible for Attorneys Fees.

A recently obtained English translation of the opinion of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal in Foundation v. UPC Nederland, agrees with the lower court decision that the MediaSentry investigation by Tom Mizzone was an insufficiently reliable basis to warrant directing Dutch ISP's to turn over confidential customer information to the RIAA's Netherlands counterpart: "neither the affidavits nor the cross-examination of Mr. Millin pro[...]vide clear and comprehensive evidence as to how the pseudonyms of the KaAaA or iMesh users were linked to the IP addresses identified by MediaSentry. No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings. They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service." The appeals court agreed with the independent experts report of Prof. Henk Sips and Dr. Johan Pouwelse of the Parallel and Distributed Systems research group at Delft University of Technology that MediaSentry's Tom Mizzone had not taken the "necessary precautions" in conducting his 'investigation' and that his investigation was 'limited' and 'simplistic', failing to "resolve... relevant technical problems such as superpeer hopping, NAT translation, and firewall relaying....[failing to implement] "actual complete file transfer....simply [taking] filenames at face value and ...[failing to make] any correction for pollution on Kazaa [despite] [p]ollution levels [on Kazaa which] can be as high as 90% for some files....[not being aware of] the limitations of Kazaa in file searching. Not many of the 2,499,121 users online would be able to see the mentioned 736 files. Reliable global searching in P2P file sharing networks is still an unsolved problem. Only users connected to the same Kazaa Superpeer are guaranteed to see these files when Kazaa operates properly (roughly 100 to 150 users as measured by Prof. Keith Ross)....[failing to take] computer hygiene precautions ..... The collected evidence of the spacemansam@KaZaA alias [query] contains multi-peer downloading contamination. Therefore, it is difficult to establish the contribution of the various IP-addresses. It is possible that some IP-addresses contributed 0 Bytes to an actual download, thus there was only involvement and no actual contribution". The Netherlands litigation recently came to the fore recently in UMG v. Lindor, a United States case, in which the RIAA is trying to prevent Ms. Lindor's attorneys from seeing the MediaSentry agreements spelling out the "instructions", "parameters", and "processes" of Mr. Mizzone's investigation, and Ms. Lindor's attorneys argue that the agreements are necessary for a proper deposition and cross-examination of Mr. Mizzone.

According to court papers by Henk Sips and Johan Powelse of Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, submitted recently in a United States RIAA v. consumer case, UMG v. Lindor, MediaSentry's 'investigations' of copyright infringers using Kazaa p2p file sharing software are flawed, having failed to resolve "relevant technical problems such as superpeer hopping, NAT translation, and firewall relaying by Kazaa". Professor Sips and Dr. Pouwelse work in the university's "Parallel and Distributed Systems" research group.

In Elektra v. Schwartz, an RIAA case against a Queens woman with Multiple Sclerosis who indicates that she had never even heard of file sharing until the RIAA came knocking on her door, the judge held that Ms. Schwartz's summary judgment request for dismissal was premature because the RIAA said it had a letter from AOL "confirm[ing] that defendant owned an internet access account through which copyrighted sound recordings were downloaded and distributed....". (Copy of order)(pdf) When her lawyers got a copy of the actual AOL letter they saw that it had no such statement in it, and asked the judge to reconsider.

In Chicago, Illinois, a Kazaa customer has filed a class action against Kazaa, Lewan v. Sharman, U.S.Dist. Ct., N.D. Ill 06-cv-6736. The lead plaintiff, Catherine Lewan, was a Kazaa customer who was sued by the RIAA for her use of Kazaa, and paid a settlement to the RIAA, and she sues on behalf of others who have been sued by the RIAA for her Kazaa use. In her complaint(pdf) she alleges, among other things, that Kazaa deceptively marketed its product as allowing "free downloads" (Complaint, par. 30); it designed the software in such a manner as to create a shared files folder and make that folder available to anyone using Kazaa, while at the same time failing to make the user aware that it had done so (Complaint, par. 36-37); and it surreptitiously installed "spyware" on users' computers which made the shared files folder accessible to the Kazaa network even after the user had removed the Kazaa software from his or her computer (Complaint, par. 42-45). Ms. Lewan and the class are represented by Charles Lee Mudd, Jr., of Chicago.

In Elektra v. Schwartz, an RIAA case against a Queens woman with Multiple Sclerosis who indicates that she had never even heard of file sharing until the RIAA came knocking on her door, the judge held that Ms. Schwartz's request for summary judgment dismissing the case was premature because the RIAA said it had a letter from AOL "confirm[ing] that defendant owned an internet access account through which copyrighted sound recordings were downloaded and distributed...."(pdf). Do they really have such a letter?

To those who might think that I might be exaggerating when I describe the RIAA's litigation campaign as a "reign of terror", how's this one: in UMG v. Lindor, the RIAA not only subpoenaed the computer of Ms. Lindor's son, who lives 4 miles away, but had their lawyer telephone the son's employer. See page 2, footnote 1.

Public Citizen, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the New York Civil Liberties Union have come out against New York's proposed new rules governing web sites, blogs, and emails, saying the rules would be unworkable in practice and would violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

In UMG v. Lindor, in Brooklyn federal court, the presiding judge has held that Marie Lindor can try to prove that the RIAA's claim of $750-per-song statutory damages is a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Constitution, since she has evidence that the actual wholesale price of the downloads is only 70 cents. This decision activates an earlier ruling by the Magistrate in the case that the record labels must now turn over "all relevant documents" regarding the prices at which they sell legal downloads to online retailers, and produce a witness to give a deposition by telephone on the subject. Judge Trager rejected the RIAA's claim that the defense was frivolous, pointing out that the RIAA had cited no authorities contradicting the defense, but Ms. Lindor's attorneys had cited cases and law review articles indicating that it was a valid defense. See Decision at pp. 6-7.

When I was much much younger I wrote two parts of a story for English class. The first embodied rebellion, and the second revenge; that was the gist of the assignments for the year. The stories were pretty horrible as I look them over now. While I had quite the imagination the effort wasn't there, but I'm happy to blame that on the fact that is was an assignment for a class I didn't like.

The story takes place in a post apocalyptic world. A hacker launches all the world nukes, and all of modern civilization goes by-by leaving pockets of life here and there.

The first story talks about how a Flier named Bower learns he has not in fact been spreading a helpful Cure over the citizens of Survival City in New Moscow ( no relation, whatever I actually meant by that ), but has instead been poisoning them to conduct experiments for the evil General Reat. Bower exacts revenge by throwing some of the radioactive chemical into General Reat's face and then running off with all the other Fliers to become rebels.

The follow up sees Bower pursued by General Reat as the group is attempting to escape and make plans. The general ends up dropping a bomb near the group. They hide thinking it to be just a regular old bomb, but no, turns out this is an enzyme bomb which gets on Bowers clothing and eats him through. I was sure to parenthetically specify that enzyme bombs were only bad if they hit synthetics first.

One of the oddest things in these stories is that the vehicles run on 'doolb.' That's blood backwards. I'm not really sure why I went for that, I guess it was somehow obvious at the time. It also is make the story slightly appropriate for me to mention it now. ( I have yet to have a trick or treater by the way )

This story brings up my apparent like for post apocalyptic stories. I've never really thought about it much, but the evidence is there. I actually like The Postman. Waterworld was not _that_ bad and you know it. If there is a movie about people trapped in some sort of natural disaster on tv during a weekend I will need to watch it all. One of my favorite is a recent one where not one, but two volcano's erupt in a major city. Lava is pouring through the city and the bright citizens who must save themselves find the Holy Grail, Jersey Barriers.

Yes, apparently Jersey Barriers can drive the tide of anything from rush hour traffic to molten lava. They also apparantly take the edge off the heat so that you can stand right next to them watching the lava flow by at chest height.

So yea, blood, lava, and mailmen on horses in the future.

Goodnight out there, Whatever you are!

My "Republicans For Voldemort" shirt is in the mail, elections are coming soon, so it seemed like a good time to say a thing or two about the issues.

Stem Cell Research

i think the easiest way to approach this issue is to reduce it down. I'll start with the man himself, President Bush and his policy in 2001 governing the last set of stem cells that were usable.

        1. The derivation process (which begins with the destruction of the embryo) was initiated prior to 9:00 P.M. EDT on August 9, 2001.
        2. The stem cells must have been derived from an embryo that was created for reproductive purposes and was no longer needed.
        3. Informed consent must have been obtained for the donation of the embryo and that donation must not have involved financial inducements.

Ok, #1 was the time line for government funding to stop. #3 is just common sense. Now lets look at #2. #2 basically says that it's ok to have used an embryo that was created for a fertility treatment, but isn't needed anymore. Mommy and Daddy wanted 1 child, 13 embryos were fertilized, the best few were picked and the rest are deemed unwanted, and will most likely be incinerated. Right there several embryos were created that were never going to be used. If you are truely against stem cell research because it creates an embyo that will be 'killed' then you also must be against fertility treatments that do the same. I'd be pretty interested to see the poll number differences on those two things.

Gay Marriage

I talked about this previously, but here goes again. First off, when we say gay marriage we can only mean legal marriage/union, that is, a document the government endorses that entitles two people to the the rights of legally married people. The religious interpretation is up to the many different churches and they are entitled to dictate whatever they want on their followers. I understand that for some the whole thing may simply be an issue of semantics between the words marriage and union, but I seriously hope that this is not the only reason they would choose to legally prevent the rights of a whole group of people.

Now from a legal stand point ( to the best of my knowledge ), you can not legally discriminate against a person due to race, sex, creed, religion, national origin, age, color, or handicapping condition. It is then illegal to prevent two legally responsible people from entering into a legal marriage on the basis on sex. There is the small issue that the person being discriminated against is not specific since it's the sex of only one of the people that needs to change for it to be 'ok,' however I think that is a pretty weak argument if used. So it comes down to this; to be against legal gay marriage is to be for legal discrimination against a mentally competent adult. The only argument I see at this point is that a gay person is mentally ill in some way. There are lots of studies both ways on this, however there is no conclusive evidence that it is legally an illness. Therefore you can not legally discriminate against it. At this point I suppose a vote against gay marriage is then a vote that being gay is to be mentally ill. This is of course anyone's prerogative, but best to realize what's really going on.

In my view, the best compromise is that the government issue legal civil unions to anyone who wishes and is able, and churches conduct marriage ceremonies. This takes care of the semantic issue which seems to be a big part of things, as well the government is not discriminating against its citizens.

It seemed like a good time to go through some randomness of late.

letteratura
 
I recently finished St. Lucy's Home for Girls Raised by Wolves, a collection of 10 short stories. It's a pretty nice set in general. All the stories take reality, toss in some fantastical themes, and then tell them from the point of view of their child leading characters. I had an issue with the style of some of the endings, but they don't really matter. The worlds created in the stories, along with the crazy characters are enough even when the endings don't come through. Plus there's a neat picture of a wolf on the cover.
 
I'll soon be done with Of Love and Other Demons. This is a book I've had since my first intership at Microsoft in 1999 where an intern started a book group, but there was way too much going on that summer for me to do much reading. 700 other interns in a new awesome city will do that to you. There are parts in the book where I'm surprised I'm not bored, but I guess Marquez has infused something in the whole store to make it all interesting.
 
I was thinking of reading At Swim-Two Birds next, but the closest half-price that has it seems to be several states away. I'll probably snag it when the next Amazon Credit Card rewards comes in.
 
A couple weeks ago I took a note from Rachel and tossed a bunch of my books up on LibraryThing. So far I've only put up books that I've read and own. Seems I only still own 50 of them. There's several I was kind of surprised to not find; in particular an oddly bound version of Snow Crash. It was slightly shorter than a paper back, but hard back and several inches thick. There was something specific about that binding that made me enjoy reading it. I guess it got lost or dontated during the great migration from Boston to Atlanta.

  litteratus
 
A week or so ago I started a short story that I think is actually ready to be fully written. It's a bit more light hearted than my other ideas which makes it somewhat easier to write. Almost all the stories I wrote in high school had a humorous slant to them by default. This one in particular has a young cave boy as the protagonist and hopes to offer up an explanation for some of the craziness that archeology has told us about cave persons.
 
I say this story is ready to be fully written because I have 2 other stories that are kind of hanging there. One needs a completely different direction so it's not so dull. It's more of an idea story, where the characters are minor to an inanimate object. It reminds me of a book Rachel has of Jacek Yerka's art pair with fairly short stories based on them. I kinda get the feeling that'd be the best route for this, but well I can't draw, so there.
 
The other story is kind of my dream story, the one I want to get right, if I get any of them. The basis for it has been with me since I was fairly young, so I want to do it justice. I have some pieces of the story, but it's not flushed out nearly enough. I do have a title though, if maybe tentative, 'anna.'

moneta
 
Approximately 34 days ago I opened an IRA and filled it out for the year. This happened to give me free trading for 45 days, which caused a small amount of craziness. While I didn't ever make a bad trade, I ran head on into a restriction that really only so called 'day traders' would care about. Due to this I prevented myself from making $300; that's a 7.5% one day gain. It kind of made me pissed with myself, but I guess lesson learned. I now know about this annoying restriction, and have real evidence that even "smart" day trading is just stupid, stupid, stupid. ( If anyone is interested in opening a brokerage account, let me know. I'll get a few free trades that would be useful for my regular account ;o) )
 
In related news, the first stock I ever bought, SGI back in 1999, was canceled earlier this week. That's right, canceled. Sgi has some trouble, went into Chapter 11 bankrupcty. As part of coming out of that, they were able to just toss all their old stock out the window. Ah well.

cattus
 
Abby got her first annual checkup back in september, I've officially had her a year. It's odd, there are times I feel like I've had her forever, that there wasn't a 13 year gap since Teddy Bear ran off into the rain to die, and then there are times I feel like I just got her. I guess that's a good sign of our relationship. Right now she's laying in the top of her cat tree watching me with almost closed eyes.

  pictura
 
Vision, my newer tivo, is still going strong. Currently I'm going through reruns of Dead Like Me, and Arrested Development. These are both shows that people just deserve to be smacked for canceling. I mean come on. I kind of blame marketing for both of their demises. I didn't feel like watching either show until well after they were canceled, so it certaintly took long enough to work on me. I recommend both highly, if you get a change give them a watch, though Arrested Development is one of those shows you're better off starting as early as possible in the series.

Alright, that's enough for one night, bonam noctem.

Is the RIAA's contract with MediaSentry, Inc. "privileged". The RIAA says yes. Marie Lindor says no. The RIAA made a protective order motion on September 27th claiming that the MediaSentry contracts are subject to attorney client privilege and work product privilege. RIAA executive vice president Bradley A. Buckles said in the RIAA's motion that "the MediaSentry Agreement provides detailed information regarding the instructions and parameters for conducting on-line investigations that were discussed and developed by the RIAA and its counsel, on behalf of the RIAA's members. The Agreement also notes processes that are highly proprietary to MediaSentry and certain sources of infringement that are beyond MediaSentry's ability to detect." The RIAA also said that "The MediaSentry Agreement is not limited to matters relating to the current lawsuit or even to lawsuits against individuals like defendant who downloaded and distributed sound recordings illegally. Rather, MediaSentry has been retained by the RIAA, on behalf of its members, to handle a wide array of anti-piracy efforts for the recording industry, and it has done so." Ms. Lindor's lawyers say, in essence, those are good reasons the documents need to be turned over, so that we can prepare to crossexamine about the (a) "proprietary" "processes" which haven't been peer-reviewed, and (b) the "instructions" and "parameters" the lawyers dictated to their so called 'experts'. Plus, they say, among other things, how can you have attorney client privilege where there's no attorney?

So that iPod virus thing that came out today. I was hit by it!!! and boy did it piss me off for so many reasons.

I'd bought my brand new shiny iPod. I even traded in my reliable 3rd gen iPod "Atrus" for it to get a discount.

So I get home plug the new sleekness in and to start with I get a message saying that I needed to upgrade to iTunes 7. Unknown to me, this was also a message that the virus was paying my computer a visit.

So I download iTunes 7, and start the installer, and ... nothing. Installer doesn't come up, I'm just sitting there with the hard drive light flickering, and then it comes. The virus software warning. You've Got Virus!!

Man that fired up. Any change in iTunes is a bad change; here they force me to upgrade to a whole new level of horribleness and, seemingly at the time, give me a virus with it!

I went through some safety measures to make sure I had a good installer, tried reinstalling and all if fine.

When I tried getting the installer again that part of the webpage ( yea just part of the page ) was down, so I figured maybe they caught something. Anyway, I figured it was a fluke, and went on my way.

Luckily that was the end of it, I have McAfee still from GaTech, and I can only assume Microsoft's is actually running since the updater has me update it's definitions multiple times a week.

But it's all ok now, and Podder is here with me. The upgrade was very very nice, even if it wasn't absolutely necessary.

The RIAA has dropped the Elektra v. Wilke case in Chicago. This is the case in which Mr. Wilke had moved for summary judgment, stating that: "1. He is not "Paule Wilke" which is the name he was sued under. 2. He has never possessed on his computer any of the songs listed in exhibit A [the list of songs the RIAA's investigator downloaded] He only had a few of the songs from exhibit B [the screenshot] on his computer, and those were from legally purchased CD's owned by Mr. Wilke. 3. He has never used any "online media distribution system" to download, distribute, or make available for distribution, any of plaintiffs' copyrighted recordings. The RIAA's initial response to the summary judgment motion, prior to the dismissal, had been to cross-move for discovery, indicating that it did not have enough evidence with which to defeat Mr. Wilke's summary judgment motion. p2pnet had termed the Wilke case yet another RIAA blunder.